PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15127020

A comparison of current prediction imaging programs.

J Dempsey Smith·Paul M Thomas·William R Proffit
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

To investigate perceived differences in the ability of current software to simulate the actual outcome of orthognathic surgery, we chose 10 difficult test cases with vertical discrepancies and "retreated" them using the actual surgical changes. Five programs--Dentofacial Planner Plus, Dolphin Imaging, Orthoplan, Quick Ceph Image, and Vistadent--were evaluated, by using both the default result and a refined result created with each program's enhancement tools. Three panels (orthodontists, oral-maxillofacial surgeons, and laypersons) judged the default images and the retouched simulations by ranking the simulations in side-by-side comparisons and by rating each simulation relative to the actual outcome on a 6-point scale. For the default and retouched images, Dentofacial Planner Plus was judged the best default simulation 79% and 59% of the time, respectively, and its default images received the best (lowest) mean score (2.46) on the 6-point scale. It also scored best (2.26) when the retouched images were compared, but the scores for Dolphin Imaging (2.83) and Quick Ceph (3.03) improved. Retouching had little impact on the scores for the other programs. Although the results show differences in simulation ability, selecting a software package depends on many factors. Performance and ease of use, cost, compatibility, and other features such as image and practice management tools are all important considerations. Users concerned with operating system compatibility and practice management integration might want to consider Dolphin Imaging and Quick Ceph, the programs comprising the second tier.

Explore related subjects

CephalometryComputer SimulationEsthetics, DentalFaceFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMalocclusionMandibleMandibular AdvancementMaxillaModels, AnatomicObserver VariationPatient Care PlanningPredictive Value of TestsPrognathismRandom AllocationRetrognathiaSoftwareTherapy, Computer-AssistedTreatment OutcomeVertical DimensionComparative StudyEvaluation StudyJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J Dempsey Smith, Paul M Thomas, William R Proffit. 2004. A comparison of current prediction imaging programs.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889540604001210

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Three-dimensional finite-element analysis of maxillary protraction with and without rapid palatal expansion.

The aims of this study were to determine the reaction of the craniofacial bones on the protraction force transferred to the maxillary body, and whether or not the midpalatal suture had opened during skeletal Class III treatment. A computerized tomograph was obtained from a dry skull with a normal occlusion to construct a three-dimensional finite-element model (3D.FEM) of the craniofacial bones and the maxillary teeth to simulate actual bone reactions. A protraction force of 500 g was applied at the first premolar region, directed 20 degrees inferior to the occlusal plane. The displacement and the stress distribution of the craniofacial bones and sutures were then calculated using the ANSYS 5.3 program dividing the analysis into two simulations, based on whether or not the midpalatal suture was opened. The results showed that there was less compressive stress and greater tensile stress in the circumaxillary suture areas when the midpalatal suture was opened. The amount of displacement and deformation when the midpalatal suture was opened also demonstrated a decrease in upward-forward rotation of the maxilla and zygomatic arch and greater amounts of displacement in the frontal, vertical, and lateral directions compared with no opening of the midpalatal suture. Analysis of these results showed that maxillary protraction produce similar changes to normal downward and forward growth of the maxilla and was achieved with accompanying opening of the midpalatal suture.

Cephalometry↗
PubMed2007

Osseointegrated implants with pendulum springs for maxillary molar distalization: a cephalometric study.

INTRODUCTION: Maxillary molar distalization is a common treatment approach for patients with Class II malocclusions who do not require extractions. Despite the many advantages of pendulum appliances, the maxillary incisors and premolars tend to shift mesially as the maxillary molars move distally. The purpose of this study was to investigate anchorage loss in patients treated with palatal osseointegrated implants combined with pendulum springs. METHODS: Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalometric films of 30 consecutively treated patients were examined. One group (n = 15) had been treated with conventional pendulum appliances, and the other group (n = 15) was treated with palatal osseointegrated implants combined with pendulum springs. RESULTS: In the pendulum group, significant distal tipping of the maxillary first molars and mesial tipping of the maxillary premolars were noted. Distalization of the maxillary first molars, mesialization of the maxillary first premolars, and proclination of the maxillary left central incisor were significant in the linear measurements. In the implant group, the distal tipping of the maxillary first molars and first premolars and the increases in SNGoGn, FMA, Na Me, and Na ANS were significant. Intergroup comparisons showed that changes in the maxillary first premolars, maxillary central incisors, and vertical measurements were significant. CONCLUSIONS: The use of palatal osseointegrated implants is reliable and provides absolute anchorage.

Cephalometry↗
PubMed2007

Photo archiving, cephalometric analyses, and information sharing on the Internet.

The method we use to collect, store, and share dental records of our patients is rapidly becoming digital. Many programs have been designed to run on a single computer or local network to handle various tasks, including cephalometric analysis and orthodontic treatment planning. Selecting a system can be complex, requiring consideration of capital investment costs and subscription or update fees, as well as the ease (or difficulty) of installing the system and learning to use it. cephX (cephX, Inc, Las Vegas, Nev) is an Internet-based digital data storage and retrieval service for cephalometric analyses, photographic storage, and online data sharing. Users pay for services as they are used, eliminating the need to buy new hardware or software.

Cephalometry↗