Agreement of in Vitro Orthodontic Measurements on Dental Plaster Casts and Digital Models Using Maestro 3D Ortho Studio Software

Overview

Journal Clin Exp Dent Res

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2022 Jun 20

PMID 35719020

Authors

Elaheh Rafiei

Alireza Haerian

Pooya Fadaei Tehrani

Mohammad Shokrollahi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: Diagnostic casts are one of the standard components of orthodontic records. But they have several drawbacks such as the need for physical space for storage and the risk of breaking due to their brittle composition. Today, the digitalization of orthodontic models is a progress in orthodontics. The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate common orthodontic linear measurements on plaster casts and digital 3D models using Maestro 3D ortho studio® scanner and software (AGE Solutions®, Pontedera, Italy).

Materials And Methods: Study casts of 30 orthodontic patients were selected. Tooth width, space analysis, Bolton analysis, overjet, overbite, and linear measurements of dental arch dimensions were performed by two examiners on plaster casts and digital models.

Statistical Analysis: Intra- and interexaminer agreements were evaluated in both manual and digital methods and paired t test was used for evaluating the agreement between the manual and digital measurement. The significance level was set at 0.05.

Results: The intraexaminer agreement was excellent (ICC > 0.75) for most variables in both manual and digital methods. The correlation between the two examiners was significant (p < .05) for most manual and digital measurements. The differences between the manual and digital measurements, although maybe statistically significant, were not clinically significant for most variables.

Conclusion: The use of "Maestro 3D" (AGE Solutions, Pontedera, Italy) scanner and software was acceptable for orthodontic diagnostic measurements instead of study casts.

Citing Articles

Agreement of in vitro orthodontic measurements on dental plaster casts and digital models using Maestro 3D ortho studio software.

Rafiei E, Haerian A, Tehrani P, Shokrollahi M Clin Exp Dent Res. 2022; 8(5):1149-1157.

PMID: 35719020 PMC: 9562564. DOI: 10.1002/cre2.605.

References

Wiranto M, Engelbrecht W, Tutein Nolthenius H, van der Meer W, Ren Y . Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 143(1):140-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.06.018. View

Torassian G, Kau C, English J, Powers J, Bussa H, Marie Salas-Lopez A . Digital models vs plaster models using alginate and alginate substitute materials. Angle Orthod. 2010; 80(4):474-81. PMC: 8966457. DOI: 10.2319/072409-413.1. View

Goonewardene R, Goonewardene M, Razza J, Murray K . Accuracy and validity of space analysis and irregularity index measurements using digital models. Aust Orthod J. 2008; 24(2):83-90. View

Czarnota J, Hey J, Fuhrmann R . Measurements using orthodontic analysis software on digital models obtained by 3D scans of plaster casts : Intrarater reliability and validity. J Orofac Orthop. 2016; 77(1):22-30. DOI: 10.1007/s00056-015-0004-2. View

Reuschl R, Heuer W, Stiesch M, Wenzel D, Dittmer M . Reliability and validity of measurements on digital study models and plaster models. Eur J Orthod. 2015; 38(1):22-26. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjv001. View

Asquith J, Gillgrass T, Mossey P . Three-dimensional imaging of orthodontic models: a pilot study. Eur J Orthod. 2007; 29(5):517-22. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjm044. View

Roberts C, Richmond S . The design and analysis of reliability studies for the use of epidemiological and audit indices in orthodontics. Br J Orthod. 1997; 24(2):139-47. DOI: 10.1093/ortho/24.2.139. View

Watanabe-Kanno G, Abrao J, Miasiro Junior H, Sanchez-Ayala A, Lagravere M . Reproducibility, reliability and validity of measurements obtained from Cecile3 digital models. Braz Oral Res. 2009; 23(3):288-95. DOI: 10.1590/s1806-83242009000300011. View

Lippold C, Kirschneck C, Schreiber K, Abukiress S, Tahvildari A, Moiseenko T . Methodological accuracy of digital and manual model analysis in orthodontics - A retrospective clinical study. Comput Biol Med. 2015; 62:103-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2015.04.012. View

10.

Lemos L, Rebello I, Vogel C, Barbosa M . Reliability of measurements made on scanned cast models using the 3 Shape R 700 scanner. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 44(6):20140337. PMC: 4628398. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20140337. View

11.

El-Zanaty H, El-Beialy A, Abou El-Ezz A, Attia K, El-Bialy A, Mostafa Y . Three-dimensional dental measurements: An alternative to plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137(2):259-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.04.030. View

12.

Mullen S, Martin C, Ngan P, Gladwin M . Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132(3):346-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.08.044. View

13.

Wan Hassan W, Othman S, Chan C, Ahmad R, Ali S, Abd Rohim A . Assessing agreement in measurements of orthodontic study models: Digital caliper on plaster models vs 3-dimensional software on models scanned by structured-light scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 150(5):886-895. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.04.021. View

14.

Abizadeh N, Moles D, ONeill J, Noar J . Digital versus plaster study models: how accurate and reproducible are they?. J Orthod. 2012; 39(3):151-9. DOI: 10.1179/1465312512Z.00000000023. View

15.

Jimenez-Gayosso S, Lara-Carrillo E, Lopez-Gonzalez S, Medina-Solis C, Scougall-Vilchis R, Hernandez-Martinez C . Difference between manual and digital measurements of dental arches of orthodontic patients. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97(22):e10887. PMC: 6392585. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000010887. View

16.

Fleming P, Marinho V, Johal A . Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2011; 14(1):1-16. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01503.x. View

17.

Quimby M, Vig K, Rashid R, Firestone A . The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74(3):298-303. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074<0298:TAAROM>2.0.CO;2. View

18.

Naidu D, Freer T . Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144(2):304-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.011. View

19.

Tavares Camardella L, Breuning H, de Vasconcellos Vilella O . Are there differences between comparison methods used to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of digital models?. Dental Press J Orthod. 2017; 22(1):65-74. PMC: 5398844. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.22.1.065-074.oar. View

20.

Martin C, Chalmers E, Chalmers E, McIntyre G, Cochrane H, Mossey P . Orthodontic scanners: what's available?. J Orthod. 2015; 42(2):136-43. DOI: 10.1179/1465313315Y.0000000001. View