J Korean Acad Prosthodont.  2019 Oct;57(4):425-431. 10.4047/jkap.2019.57.4.425.

Digital approach integrating 3D facial scan and a virtual mockup for esthetic restorative treatment: A case report

• Mai HY
• Choi YD
• Lee DH

• KMID: 2461150
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2019.57.4.425

Abstract

This clinical case report describes the digital workflow that combines a face scan, cone beam computed tomography and an intraoral scan to visualize the outcome of prosthodontic treatment in the anterior region. This approach improves communication between clinic, laboratory and patients. A patient with healthy general condition came for a restorative treatment to treat post-traumatic central incisors of maxilla. A virtual patient replica was made by incorporating a face scan, cone beam computed tomography and an intraoral scan. Design mockup of definitive restorations was shown to the patient and modified according to the patient's desire. This digital workflow facilitates the fabrication of optimal esthetic restorations, and enhances the predictability of outcome of restorations.

Keyword

Digital workflow; Face scan; Cone-beam computed tomography; Intraoral scan; Image merging; Visualization

MeSH Terms

Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Humans
Incisor
Maxilla

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 (A) 3D facial scan image, (B) Cone-beam computed tomography image, (C) Optical scan image of master cast.

• 

  Fig. 2 Image conversion from DICOM format to 3D mesh format.

• 

  Fig. 3 Image merging of face scan and computed tomography images using Scout image. (A) Sagittal view, (B) Horizontal view.

• 

  Fig. 4 Image merging of computed tomography and intraoral scan images using remaining teeth. (A) Intraoral scan image, (B) Matched scan image on computed tomography.

• 

  Fig. 5 Restoration mockup image in face scan image.

• 

  Fig. 6 Delivery of definitive restorations.

Reference

1. Joda T, Zarone F, Ferrari M. The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review. BMC Oral Health. 2017; 17:124.

2. Zhou Q, Wang Z, Chen J, Song J, Chen L, Lu Y. Development and evaluation of a digital dental modeling method based on grating projection and reverse engineering software. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115:42–46.

3. Bhargav A, Sanjairaj V, Rosa V, Feng LW, Fuh Yh J. Applications of additive manufacturing in dentistry: A review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2018; 106:2058–2064.

4. Koch GK, Gallucci GO, Lee SJ. Accuracy in the digital workflow: From data acquisition to the digitally milled cast. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115:749–754.

5. van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012; 28:3–12.

6. Young JM, Altschuler BR. Laser holography in dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 1977; 38:216–225.

7. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc. 2009; 140:1301–1304.

8. Mangano F, Gandolfi A, Luongo G, Logozzo S. Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature. BMC Oral Health. 2017; 17:149.

9. Aragón ML, Pontes LF, Bichara LM, Flores-Mir C, Normando D. Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod. 2016; 38:429–434.

10. Ender A, Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int. 2015; 46:9–17.

11. Goracci C, Franchi L, Vichi A, Ferrari M. Accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions: a systematic review of the clinical evidence. Eur J Orthod. 2016; 38:422–428.

12. Budak I, Vukelić D, Bračun D, Hodolič J, Soković M. Preprocessing of point-data from contact and optical 3D digitization sensors. Sensors (Basel). 2012; 12:1100–1126.

13. Chochlidakis KM, Papaspyridakos P, Geminiani A, Chen CJ, Feng IJ, Ercoli C. Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 116:184–190.

14. Kattadiyil MT, Jekki R, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ. Comparison of treatment outcomes in digital and conventional complete removable dental prosthesis fabrications in a predoctoral setting. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114:818–825.

15. Farahani N, Braun A, Jutt D, Huffman T, Reder N, Liu Z, Yagi Y, Pantanowitz L. Three-dimensional Imaging and Scanning: Current and Future Applications for Pathology. J Pathol Inform. 2017; 8:36.

16. Da Silveira AC, Daw JL Jr, Kusnoto B, Evans C, Cohen M. Craniofacial applications of three-dimensional laser surface scanning. J Craniofac Surg. 2003; 14:449–456.

17. Mankovich NJ, Samson D, Pratt W, Lew D, Beumer J 3rd. Surgical planning using three-dimensional imaging and computer modeling. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1994; 27:875–889.

18. Cattoni F, Mastrangelo F, Gherlone EF, Gastaldi G. A new total digital smile planning technique (3D-DSP) to fabricate CAD-CAM mockups for esthetic crowns and veneers. Int J Dent. 2016; 2016:6282587.

19. Sorensen JA. The evolution and revolution in prosthodontics continues. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2016; 37:402–404.

20. Lin WS, Zandinejad A, Metz MJ, Harris BT, Morton D. Predictable restorative work flow for computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacture-fabricated ceramic veneers utilizing a virtual smile design principle. Oper Dent. 2015; 40:357–363.

21. Liu X, Liu J, Mao H, Tan J. A digital technique for replicating peri-implant soft tissue contours and the emergence profile. J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 118:264–267.

22. Abduo J, Bennamoun M, Tennant M, McGeachie J. Impact of digital prosthodontic planning on dental esthetics: Biometric analysis of esthetic parameters. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115:57–64.

23. Im J, Cha JY, Lee KJ, Yu HS, Hwang CJ. Comparison of virtual and manual tooth setups with digital and plaster models in extraction cases. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014; 145:434–442.

24. Hassan B, Gimenez Gonzalez B, Tahmaseb A, Greven M, Wismeijer D. A digital approach integrating facial scanning in a CAD-CAM workflow for complete-mouth implant-supported rehabilitation of patients with edentulism: A pilot clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 117:486–492.

25. Pimentel W, Teixeira ML, Costa PP, Jorge MZ, Tiossi R. Predictable outcomes with porcelain laminate veneers: A clinical report. J Prosthodont. 2016; 25:335–340.

26. Edelhoff D, Liebermann A, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Güth JF. Minimally invasive treatment options in fixed prosthodontics. Quintessence Int. 2016; 47:207–216.

27. Zimmermann M, Mehl A. Virtual smile design systems: a current review. Int J Comput Dent. 2015; 18:303–317.