View more from Listerine
Switch to Dark theme

References

Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999; 28:(4)245-248
Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique – preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 1998; 8:(9)1558-1564
Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, New Tom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006; 35:(4)219-226
Kalathingsal SM, Mol A, Tyndall DA In vitro assessment of cone beam local computed tomography for proximal caries detection. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007; 104:699-704
Tyndall DA, Rathore S. Cone-Beam CT diagnostic applications: caries, periodontal bone assessment, and endodontic applications. Dent Clin N Am. 2008; 52:825-841
Spector L. Computer-aided dental implant planning. Dent Clin N Am. 2008; 52:761-775
Armstrong C, Johnston C, Burden D, Stevenson M. Localising ectopic maxillary canines – horizontal or vertical parallax. Eur J Orthod. 2003; 25:585-589
Ericson S, Kurol J. Resorption of incisors after ectopic eruption of maxillary canines: a CT study. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70:415-423
White SC, Pae EK. Patient image selection criteria for cone beam computed tomography imaging. Semin Orthod. 2009; 15:19-28
Cohenca N, Simon JH, Roges R, Morag Y, Malfaz J. Clinical indications for digital imaging in dento-alveolar trauma. Part 1: Traumatic injuries. Dent Traumatol. 2006; 23:95-104
Terakado M, Hashimoto K, Arai Y, Honda M, Sekiwa T, Sato H. Diagnostic imaging with newly developed ortho cubic super-high resolution computed tomography (Ortho-CT). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000; 89:(4)509-518
Fuster-Torres M, Albalat-Estela S, Amcaniz-Raya M, Penarrocha-Diago M. CAD/CAM dental systems in implant dentistry: Update. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009; 14:141-145
Geiselhoringer H, Holst S. Advantages of CAD/CAM technology – a laboratory and a clinical perspective. Dental Tribune. 2009; 6:14-17
Joffe L. Current products and practices. OrthoCad–: digital models for a digital era. J Orthod. 2004; 31:344-347
Quimby ML, Vig KWL, Rashid RG, Firestone AR. The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74:298-303
Peluso MJ, Josell SD, Levine SW, Lorei B. Digital models: an introduction. Semin Orthod. 2004; 10:226-238
Stevens DR, Flore-Mire C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. 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 Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 129:794-803
Zilberman O, Huggare JAV, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod. 2003; 73:301-306
Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay O, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124:101-105
Dalstra M, Melsen B. From alginate impressions to digital virtual models: accuracy and reproducibility. J Orthod. 2009; 36:36-41
Whetten JL, Williamson PC, Heo G, Varnhagen C, Major PW. Variations in orthodontic treatment planning decisions of Class II patients between virtual 3-dimensional models and traditional plaster study models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130:485-491
Kau CH, Richmond S, Zhurov AI Reliability of measuring facial morphology with a 3-dimensional laser scanning system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128:424-430
Khambay B, Nairn N, Bell A, Miller J, Bowman A, Ayoub AF. Validation and reproducibility of a high-resolution 3D facial imaging system. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 46:(1)27-32
Hood CA, Bock M, Hosey MT, Bowman A, Ayoub AF. Facial asymmetry – 3D assessment of infants with CLP. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2003; 13:404-410
Devlin MF, Ray A, Raine P, Bowman A, Ayoub AF. Facial symmetry in UCLP following alar base augmentation with bone graft: a 3D assessment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2007; 44:391-395
Hajeer MY, Ayoub AF, Millett DT. Three-dimensional assessment of facial soft-tissue asymmetry before and after orthognathic surgery. Br J Oral Max Fac Surg. 2004; 42:(5)396-404
Popat H, Richmond S. New developments in: three-dimensional planning for orthognathic surgery. J Orthod. 2010; 37:(1)62-71
Kau CH, Richmond S. Three-dimensional analysis of facial morphology surface changes in untreated children from 12 to 14 years of age. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 134:751-760
Morris DO, Illing HM, Lee RT. A prospective evaluation of Bass, Bionator and Twin Block appliances. Part II – The soft tissues. Eur J Orthod. 1998; 20:663-684
Ismail SF, Moss JP, Hennessy R. 3D assessment of the effects of extraction and nonextraction orthodontic treatment on the face. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 121:244-256

The current status of 3d imaging in dental practice

From Volume 38, Issue 10, December 2011 | Pages 679-690

Authors

C McNamara

FTTA in Orthodontics, Gloucestershire NHS Foundation Trust

Articles by C McNamara

K House

Consultant Orthodontist, Gloucestershire NHS Foundation Trust

Articles by K House

Rebecca Davies

BChD, MFDS RCS, MSc DDR

SpR Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology, Bristol and Birmingham

Articles by Rebecca Davies

CS Barker

DDS, BChD, MFDS RCS(Ed), MOrth RCS (Ed), FDS(Orth) RCS(Eng), PGCert(Med Ed)

Specialist Registrar in Orthodontics, Bristol NHS Foundation Trust

Articles by CS Barker

O Chawla

Senior House Officer in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Maxillofacial Unit, Royal Shrewsbury Hospital, Mytton Oak Road, Shrewsbury, SY3 8XQ, UK

Articles by O Chawla

JR Sandy

Consultant Orthodontist, Bristol NHS Foundation Trus

Articles by JR Sandy

AJ Ireland

Consultant Orthodontist, Bristol NHS Foundation Trust

Articles by AJ Ireland

Abstract

This article aims to describe the current status of 3-dimensional (3D) imaging in dental practice. Advances in this field have made 3D imaging far more accessible in all dental fields. This paper describes methods of imaging dental hard and soft tissues and their clinical uses. In addition, the potential advantages and disadvantages of various systems are discussed, as well as expected future developments.

Clinical Relevance: The potential uses of 3D images in dental practice are ever increasing. Imaging systems are now far more accessible for clinical decision-making and patient information.

Article

Technology in dentistry continues to develop and improve at what seems to be an ever increasing pace. Whereas in the past we relied on conventional analogue records, such as study and working models, along with 2D radiography, dentistry is now well and truly embracing the digital age. In particular, advances in 3D digital technology mean that we are able to record, construct and reconstruct both 3D intra- and extra-oral images.

This paper aims to provide an overview of the current uses of 3D imaging in dentistry, exploring the new advances along with their advantages and disadvantages. In particular, it will focus on 3D radiography, CAD/CAM, model and facial scanning.

Until relatively recently the only way to get good quality 3D radiographic scans was to use conventional computerized tomography (CT). However, not only were the machines not readily available, except in hospital radiography departments, but their use was associated with a high radiation dose, high cost, and relatively poor resolution when used for dental purposes. The dental images produced could also be difficult to interpret.

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Up to 2 free articles per month
  • New content available

Already have an account? Sign in here