TSegNet: An efficient and accurate tooth segmentation network on 3D dental model

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
pp. 101949
Author(s):  
Zhiming Cui ◽  
Changjian Li ◽  
Nenglun Chen ◽  
Guodong Wei ◽  
Runnan Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dental Model ◽  
Tooth Segmentation

scholarly journals A SYMMETRIC FULLY CONVOLUTIONAL RESIDUAL NETWORK WITH DCRF FOR ACCURATE TOOTH SEGMENTATION

IEEE Access ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Yunbo Rao ◽  
Yilin Wang ◽  
Fanman Meng ◽  
Jiansu Pu ◽  
Jihong Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Residual Network ◽  
Tooth Segmentation

scholarly journals Scanning Accuracy of Bracket Features and Slot Base Angle in Different Bracket Materials by Four Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 365
Author(s):  
Seon-Hee Shin ◽  
Hyung-Seog Yu ◽  
Jung-Yul Cha ◽  
Jae-Sung Kwon ◽  
Chung-Ju Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Sem Images ◽  
Polycrystalline Alumina ◽  
Base Angle ◽  
Accurate Expression ◽  
Dental Model ◽  
Alumina Composite ◽  
The Difference

The accurate expression of bracket prescription is important for successful orthodontic treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of digital scan images of brackets produced by four intraoral scanners (IOSs) when scanning the surface of the dental model attached with different bracket materials. Brackets made from stainless steel, polycrystalline alumina, composite, and composite/stainless steel slot were considered, which have been scanned from four different IOSs (Primescan, Trios, CS3600, and i500). SEM images were used as references. Each bracket axis was set in the reference scan image, and the axis was set identically by superimposing with the IOS image, and then only the brackets were divided and analyzed. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the differences. The difference between the manufacturer’s nominal torque and bracket slot base angle was 0.39 in SEM, 1.96 in Primescan, 2.04 in Trios, and 5.21 in CS3600 (p < 0.001). The parallelism, which is the difference between the upper and lower angles of the slot wall, was 0.48 in SEM, 7.00 in Primescan, 5.52 in Trios, 6.34 in CS3600, and 23.74 in i500 (p < 0.001). This study evaluated the accuracy of the bracket only, and it must be admitted that there is some error in recognizing slots through scanning in general.

scholarly journals Accuracy of digital dental models and three-dimensional printed dental models in linear measurements and Bolton analysis

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 180
Author(s):  
William Suryajaya ◽  
Maria Purbiati ◽  
Nada Ismah
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Interobserver Reliability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
3D Printer ◽  
Intraoral Scanner ◽  
Linear Measurements ◽  
Dental Model ◽  
Dental Models ◽  
Digital Dental Models

Background: Due to advances in digital technology, it is possible to obtain digital dental models through intraoral scanning. The stereolithographic data collected from the scanner can subsequently be printed into a three-dimensional dental model in resinic material. However, the accuracy between digital dental models and printed dental models needs to be evaluated since it might affect diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of digital models scanned by a Trios intraoral scanner and three-dimensional dental models printed using a Formlabs 2 3D printer in linear measurements and Bolton analysis. Methods: A total of 35 subjects were included in this study. All subjects were scanned using a Trios intraoral scanner to obtain digital study models. Stereolithographic data from previous scanning was printed using a Formlabs 2 3D printer to obtain printed study models. Mesiodistal, intercanine, intermolar, and Bolton analysis from all types of study models were measured. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess intraobserver and interobserver reliability. All data were then statistically analyzed. Results: The reliability tests were high for both intraobserver and interobserver reliability, which demonstrates high reproducibility for all measurements on all model types. Most of the data compared between study models showed no statistically significant differences, though some data differed significantly. However, the differences are considered clinically insignificant. Conclusion: Digital dental models and three-dimensional printed dental models may be used interchangeably with plaster dental models for diagnostic and treatment planning purposes. Keywords: Accuracy, 3D printing, digital dental model, printed dental model.

scholarly journals Interactive Tooth Separation from Dental Model Using Segmentation Field

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e0161159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhongyi Li ◽  
Hao Wang
Keyword(s):  
Dental Model

Influence of the polymerization post-processing procedures on the accuracy of additively manufactured dental model material

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Delaram Mostafavi ◽  
Mohammed Methani ◽  
Wenceslao Piedra-Cascón ◽  
Amirali Zandinejad ◽  
Wael Att ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Model Material ◽  
Post Processing ◽  
Dental Model

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 79
Author(s):  
Aalaa Emara ◽  
Neha Sharma ◽  
Florian S. Halbeisen ◽  
Bilal Msallem ◽  
Florian M. Thieringer
Keyword(s):  
Intraoral Scanner ◽  
Optical Scanner ◽  
Lower Accuracy ◽  
Dental Model ◽  
Dental Models ◽  
User Friendly ◽  
Dental Cast ◽  
Plaster Models ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Median Deviation

Rapidly developing digital dental technologies have substantially simplified the documentation of plaster dental models. The large variety of available scanners with varying degrees of accuracy and cost, however, makes the purchase decision difficult. This study assessed the digitization accuracy of a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and an intraoral scanner (IOS), as compared to a desktop optical scanner (OS). Ten plaster dental models were digitized three times (n = 30) with each scanner. The generated STL files were cross-compared, and the RMS values were calculated. Conclusions were drawn about the accuracy with respect to precision and trueness levels. The precision of the CBCT scanner was similar to the desktop OS reference, which both had a median deviation of 0.04 mm. The IOS had statistically significantly higher deviation compared to the reference OS, with a median deviation of 0.18 mm. The trueness values of the CBCT was also better than that of IOS—median differences of 0.14 and 0.17 mm, respectively. We conclude that the tested CBCT scanner is a highly accurate and user-friendly scanner for model digitization, and therefore a valuable alternative to the OS. The tested IOS was generally of lower accuracy, but it can still be used for plaster dental model digitization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document