Efficient digitalization method for dental restorations using micro-CT data

The objective of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of using micro-CT scan of dental impressions for fabricating dental restorations and to compare the dimensional accuracy of dental models generated from various methods. The key idea of the proposed protocol is that dental impression of patients can be accurately digitized by micro-CT scan and that one can make digital cast model from micro-CT data directly. As air regions of the micro-CT scan data of dental impression are equivalent to the real teeth and surrounding structures, one can segment the air regions and fabricate digital cast model in the STL format out of them. The proposed method was validated by a phantom study using a typodont with prepared teeth. Actual measurement and deviation map analysis were performed after acquiring digital cast models for each restoration methods. Comparisons of the milled restorations were also performed by placing them on the prepared teeth of typodont. The results demonstrated that an efficient fabrication of precise dental restoration is achievable by use of the proposed method.

[1]  Laurent Tapie,et al.  Understanding dental CAD/CAM for restorations--accuracy from a mechanical engineering viewpoint. , 2015, International journal of computerized dentistry.

[2]  R. Brooks,et al.  Beam hardening in X-ray reconstructive tomography , 1976 .

[3]  Mike Decker,et al.  Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro. , 2014, Journal of dentistry.

[4]  Jeremy Knox,et al.  A Comparison of Plaster, Digital and Reconstructed Study Model Accuracy , 2008, Journal of orthodontics.

[5]  T. Alcan,et al.  The relationship between digital model accuracy and time-dependent deformation of alginate impressions. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[6]  A F Ayoub,et al.  Assessment of the Accuracy of a Three-Dimensional Imaging System for Archiving Dental Study Models , 2003, Journal of orthodontics.

[7]  M N Mandikos,et al.  Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: an update on clinical use. , 1998, Australian dental journal.

[8]  Terry E Donovan,et al.  A review of contemporary impression materials and techniques. , 2004, Dental clinics of North America.

[9]  Sang J. Lee,et al.  Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes. , 2013, Clinical oral implants research.

[10]  G. Herman Correction for beam hardening in computed tomography. , 1979, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  C D Stephens,et al.  Storage of Orthodontic Study Models in Hospital Units in the U.K. , 1992, British journal of orthodontics.

[12]  Fan Zhang,et al.  Validity of Intraoral Scans Compared with Plaster Models: An In-Vivo Comparison of Dental Measurements and 3D Surface Analysis , 2016, PloS one.

[13]  William E. Lorensen,et al.  Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm , 1987, SIGGRAPH.

[14]  P. Hammersberg,et al.  Correction for beam hardening artefacts in computerised tomography. , 1998, Journal of X-ray science and technology.

[15]  Bernd Wöstmann,et al.  Accuracy of intraoral and extraoral digital data acquisition for dental restorations , 2016, Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB.

[16]  Djordje Vukelic,et al.  Comparative analysis on measuring performances of dental intraoral and extraoral optical 3D digitization systems , 2014 .

[17]  A. Mehl,et al.  Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions--an in-vitro study. , 2011, International journal of computerized dentistry.

[18]  R. G. Craig,et al.  Trends in elastomeric impression materials. , 1994, Operative dentistry.

[19]  Anssi J. Mäkynen,et al.  Recent advances in dental optics – Part I: 3D intraoral scanners for restorative dentistry , 2014 .

[20]  Amy Morgan,et al.  Versatile CAD/CAM digital impression technology. , 2010, Dentistry today.

[21]  Thomas J Cangialosi,et al.  Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. , 2003, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[22]  W. Scarfe,et al.  Comparison of digital scanning and polyvinyl siloxane impression techniques by dental students: instructional efficiency and attitudes towards technology , 2017, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[23]  Chan-Jin Park,et al.  Comparison of intraoral scanning and conventional impression techniques using 3-dimensional superimposition , 2015, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[24]  Eduardo Cuesta,et al.  Influence of surface material on the quality of laser triangulation digitized point clouds for reverse engineering tasks , 2009, 2009 IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation.

[25]  Matthew J. Peluso,et al.  Digital models: An introduction , 2004 .

[26]  D. Chan,et al.  The accuracy of optical scanning: influence of convergence and die preparation. , 2011, Operative dentistry.

[27]  Sivabalan Vasudavan,et al.  Comparison of intraoral 3D scanning and conventional impressions for fabrication of orthodontic retainers. , 2010, Journal of clinical orthodontics : JCO.

[28]  D. Fried,et al.  Remineralization of Enamel Caries Can Decrease Optical Reflectivity , 2006, Journal of dental research.

[29]  H. Tuy AN INVERSION FORMULA FOR CONE-BEAM RECONSTRUCTION* , 1983 .

[30]  E. Yuzbasioglu,et al.  Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes , 2014, BMC oral health.

[31]  R DeLong,et al.  Accuracy of a System for Creating 3D Computer Models of Dental Arches , 2003, Journal of dental research.