Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 1999
Accuracy of integration of dental casts in three-dimensional models.
Клинический случайСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Terai H, Shimahara M, Sakinaka Y, Tajima S
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study investigated errors occurring in three-dimensional (3D) models when plaster dental casts are integrated into them.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional milling models of three patients with a jaw deformity were fabricated using the Endoplan system (SPARC International Inc, Santa Clara, CA). After this, plaster dental casts were integrated into the 3D models using a face-bow transfer system. Two cephalograms were then compared, one obtained from the patient and the other obtained from the 3D model painted with contrast medium.
RESULTS: In two cases, the reproducibility of the dental position as determined by angle analysis was within 2 degrees, and that determined by distance analysis was within 2 mm. However, errors over 4 degrees and 4.2 mm, respectively, were observed in one case.
CONCLUSION: It is clinically important to confirm the accuracy of the 3D model by cephalometric analysis, and it may be necessary to reposition the dental model based on the results.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional milling models of three patients with a jaw deformity were fabricated using the Endoplan system (SPARC International Inc, Santa Clara, CA). After this, plaster dental casts were integrated into the 3D models using a face-bow transfer system. Two cephalograms were then compared, one obtained from the patient and the other obtained from the 3D model painted with contrast medium.
RESULTS: In two cases, the reproducibility of the dental position as determined by angle analysis was within 2 degrees, and that determined by distance analysis was within 2 mm. However, errors over 4 degrees and 4.2 mm, respectively, were observed in one case.
CONCLUSION: It is clinically important to confirm the accuracy of the 3D model by cephalometric analysis, and it may be necessary to reposition the dental model based on the results.