Korean J Orthod.  2018 Jul;48(4):262-267. 10.4041/kjod.2018.48.4.262.

Clinical application of an intraoral scanner for serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement: A preliminary study

• Yun D
• Choi DS
• Jang I
• Cha BK

• KMID: 2417968
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2018.48.4.262

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test the clinical application of an intraoral scanner for serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement. The maxillary dentitions of eight patients with fixed orthodontic appliances were scanned using an intraoral scanner at the beginning of treatment (T0), and at 1 month (T1), 2 months (T2), 3 months (T3), and 4 months (T4) after T0. The serial digital models were superimposed on the palatal surface as a reference area, and the linear and angular changes of the central incisors, canines, and first molars were evaluated. The intraclass correlation coefficient and method errors showed that this method was clinically acceptable. Various types of orthodontic tooth movements, including minute movements, could be observed every month. The intraoral scanner and digital superimposition technique enabled the serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement without taking serial impressions and/or acquiring radiographs.

Keyword

Dental model; Intraoral scanner; Tooth movement; Three-dimensional

MeSH Terms

Dental Models
Dentition
Humans
Incisor
Methods
Molar
Orthodontic Appliances
Tooth Movement*
Tooth*

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Three-dimensional (3D) digital model of the maxillary dentition. A, The 3D coordinate system for evaluating tooth movement; B, reference area (red) for superimposition; C, reference points on the maxillary incisor; D, maxillary canine; and E, maxillary first molar. Point O, The point where the palatine raphe meets the incisive papilla; Point 1, the mesio-gingival point of the bracket or tube base; Point 2, the mesio-occlusal point of the bracket or tube base; Point 3, the disto-occlusal point of the bracket or tube base; Point 4, the midpoint of the Point 1 and Point 3.

• 

  Figure 2 Occlusal views and sagittal views of serial digital models from T0 to T4 of Patient #1 (extraction case) and Patient #2 (nonextraction case). T0, Initial; T1, in 1 month; T2, in 2 months; T3, in 3 months; T4, in 4 months.

Reference

1. Ghafari J, Baumrind S, Efstratiadis SS. Misinterpreting growth and treatment outcome from serial cephalographs. Clin Orthod Res. 1998; 1:102–106.

2. Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124:101–105.

3. Cha BK, Choi JI, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Jeong YM. Applications of three-dimensionally scanned models in orthodontics. Int J Comput Dent. 2007; 10:41–52.

4. Lim MY, Lim SH. Comparison of model analysis measurements among plaster model, laser scan digital model, and cone beam CT image. Korean J Orthod. 2009; 39:6–17.

5. Cha BK, Lee JY, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Yoshida N. Analysis of tooth movement in extraction cases using three-dimensional reverse engineering technology. Eur J Orthod. 2007; 29:325–331.

6. Jang I, Tanaka M, Koga Y, Iijima S, Yozgatian JH, Cha BK, et al. A novel method for the assessment of three-dimensional tooth movement during orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 2009; 79:447–453.

7. Lee SJ, Jang SY, Chun YS, Lim WH. Three-dimensional analysis of tooth movement after intrusion of a supraerupted molar using a mini-implant with partial-fixed orthodontic appliances. Angle Orthod. 2013; 83:274–279.

8. Ali D, Mohammed H, Koo SH, Kang KH, Kim SC. Three-dimensional evaluation of tooth movement in Class II malocclusions treated without extraction by orthodontic mini-implant anchorage. Korean J Orthod. 2016; 46:280–289.

9. Cuperus AM, Harms MC, Rangel FA, Bronkhorst EM, Schols JG, Breuning KH. Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: a validation study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 142:308–313.

10. Anh JW, Park JM, Chun YS, Kim M, Kim M. A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod. 2016; 46:3–12.

11. Bonett DG. Sample size requirements for estimating intraclass correlations with desired precision. Stat Med. 2002; 21:1331–1335.