Top

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie

Published in:

01-11-2016 | Original Article

Virtual setup: application in orthodontic practice

Authors: Leonardo T. Camardella, Eduardo Kant C. Rothier, Oswaldo V. Vilella, Edwin M. Ongkosuwito, Karel Hero Breuning

Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Issue 6/2016

Abstract

Background

A plaster dental model is a patient’s traditional three-dimensional (3D) record. If the dental crowns from a plaster model are separated and positioned in wax, this setup of the crowns can be used to simulate orthodontic treatment. The traditional way to make this dental setup requires significant time by the orthodontist and in the orthodontic lab. New developments in dentistry and orthodontics include the possibility of virtual setups.

Aim

In this article, the differences between conventional setups with plaster models and virtual setups are discussed.

Methods

A clinical patient is described for whom two different setups were made and compared by model superimposition with Geomagic Qualify software.

Results

According to the literature and the results from this study, virtual setups and conventional setups with plaster models are equally accurate.

Conclusion

Virtual setups present several advantages, e.g., digital storage, digital models cannot be damaged, the same model can undergo several treatment simulations, and communication between dental and surgical professionals and between dental professionals and patients is facilitated. Despite these advantages, considerable time and training are needed for dental professionals to master and adopt the general use of digital models and virtual setups in dentistry.

Alford TJ, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK et al (2011) Clinical outcomes for patients finished with the SureSmile method compared with conventional fixed orthodontic therapy. Angle Orthod 81:383–388CrossRefPubMed

Araujo TM, Fonseca LM, Caldus LD et al (2012) Preparation and evaluation of orthodontic setup. Dental Press J Orthod 17:146–165CrossRef

Barreto MS, Faber J, Vogel CJ et al (2016) Reliability of digital orthodontic setups. Angle Orthod 86:255–259CrossRefPubMed

Breuning KH (2011) Efficient tooth movement with new technologies for customized treatment. J Clin Orthod 45:257–262 (quiz 87) PubMed

Chen S, Xu TM (2013) Treatment of a severe transverse dental arch discrepancy assisted by 3-dimensional planning. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 143:105–115CrossRef

Choi DS, Jeong YM, Jang I et al (2010) Accuracy and reliability of palatal superimposition of three-dimensional digital models. Angle Orthod 80:497–503PubMed

Fabels LN, Nijkamp PG (2014) Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliabilities of 3-dimensional orthodontic virtual setups. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 146:806–811CrossRef

Flugge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K et al (2013) Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 144:471–478CrossRef

Goonewardene RW, Goonewardene MS, Razza JM et al (2008) Accuracy and validity of space analysis and irregularity index measurements using digital models. Aust Orthod J 24:83–90PubMed

10.

Gracco A, Buranello M, Cozzani M et al (2007) Digital and plaster models: a comparison of measurements and times. Prog Orthod 8:252–259PubMed

11.

Grauer D, Proffit WR (2011) Accuracy in tooth positioning with a fully customized lingual orthodontic appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 140:433–443CrossRef

12.

Horton HM, Miller JR, Gaillard PR et al (2010) Technique comparison for efficient orthodontic tooth measurements using digital models. Angle Orthod 80:254–261CrossRefPubMed

13.

Im J, Cha JY, Lee KJ et al (2014) Comparison of virtual and manual tooth setups with digital and plaster models in extraction cases. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 145:434–442CrossRef

14.

Kesling H (1956) The diagnostic setup with consideration of the third dimension. Am J Orthod 42:740–748CrossRef

15.

Kihara T, Tanimoto K, Michida M et al (2012) Construction of orthodontic setup models on a computer. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 141:806–813CrossRef

16.

Larson BE, Vaubel CJ, Grunheid T (2013) Effectiveness of computer-assisted orthodontic treatment technology to achieve predicted outcomes. Angle Orthod 83:557–562CrossRefPubMed

17.

Leifert MF, Leifert MM, Efstratiadis SS et al (2009) Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136:16e1–16e4 (discussion)

18.

Macchi A, Carrafiello G, Cacciafesta V et al (2006) Three-dimensional digital modeling and setup. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 129:605–610CrossRef

19.

Miller RJ, Derakhshan M (2004) Three-dimensional technology improves the range of orthodontic treatment with esthetic and removable aligners. World J Orthod 5:242–249PubMed

20.

Mujagic M, Fauquet C, Galletti C et al (2005) Digital design and manufacturing of the Lingualcare bracket system. J Clin Orthod 39:375–382 (quiz 0) PubMed

21.

Mullen SR, Martin CA, Ngan P et al (2007) Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 132:346–352CrossRef

22.

Park TJ, Lee SH, Lee KS (2012) A method for mandibular dental arch superimposition using 3D cone beam CT and orthodontic 3D digital model. Korean J Orthod 42:169–181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Quimby ML, Vig KW, Rashid RG et al (2004) The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod 74:298–303PubMed

24.

Rangel FA, Maal TJ, Bronkhorst EM et al (2013) Accuracy and reliability of a novel method for fusion of digital dental casts and Cone Beam Computed Tomography scans. PLoS ONE 8:e59130CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Rheude B, Sadowsky PL, Ferriera A et al (2005) An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Angle Orthod 75:300–304PubMed

26.

Sachdeva RC (2001) SureSmile technology in a patient–centered orthodontic practice. J Clin Orthod 35:245–253PubMed

27.

Sousa MV, Vasconcelos EC, Janson G et al (2012) Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 142:269–273CrossRef

28.

Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B et al (2006) Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 129:794–803CrossRef

29.

Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM et al (2001) A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod 71:351–357PubMed

30.

Torassian G, Kau CH, English JD et al (2010) Digital models vs plaster models using alginate and alginate substitute materials. Angle Orthod 80:474–481CrossRefPubMed

31.

van der Linden FP (1978) Changes in the position of posterior teeth in relation to ruga points. Am J Orthod 74:142–161CrossRefPubMed

32.

Wiranto MG, Engelbrecht WP, Nolthenius HET et al (2013) 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 Dentofac Orthop 143:140–147CrossRef

Title: Virtual setup: application in orthodontic practice
Authors: Leonardo T. Camardella
Eduardo Kant C. Rothier
Oswaldo V. Vilella
Edwin M. Ongkosuwito
Karel Hero Breuning
Publication date: 01-11-2016
Publisher: Springer Medizin
Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Issue 6/2016
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Electronic ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-016-0048-y

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Virtual setup: application in orthodontic practice

Abstract

Background

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2016

Post-treatment changes in permanent retention

Patient survey on Invisalign® treatment comparen the SmartTrack® material to the previous aligner material

Retraction Note to: Hidrotische ektodermale Dysplasie

Frontal-view nasolabial soft tissue alterations after bimaxillary orthognathic surgery in Class III patients

Mitteilungen der DGKFO

Efficacy of a new sealant to prevent white spot lesions during fixed orthodontic treatment