Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37500683›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

3D assessment of the nasolabial region in cleft models comparing an intraoral and a facial scanner to a validated baseline.

Manuel Olmos, Ragai Matta, Mayte Buchbender, Fabian Jaeckel, Christopher-Philipp Nobis, Manuel Weber, Marco Kesting, Rainer Lutz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Manuel OlmosDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glueckstrasse 11, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Ragai MattaDepartment of Prosthodontics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Mayte BuchbenderDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glueckstrasse 11, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Fabian JaeckelDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glueckstrasse 11, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Christopher-Philipp NobisDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glueckstrasse 11, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Manuel WeberDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glueckstrasse 11, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Marco KestingDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glueckstrasse 11, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Rainer LutzDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glueckstrasse 11, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. rainer.lutz@uk-erlangen.de.
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aimed to validate the metric accuracy of a 3-dimensional (3D) facial scanner (FS) and an intraoral scanner (IOS) in capturing the nasolabial region in ex vivo unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) models. The nasolabial region of 10 UCLP models was scanned using a 3D FS as well as an IOS and a previously validated stationary 3D scanner as a reference. Intraoral scan was performed directly on the UCLP models. In order to apply the FS on the models, they were embedded in a 3D printed sample face. Both test groups were aligned to the reference by applying a section-based best-fit algorithm. Subsequent analysis of the metric deviation from the reference was performed with a 3D analysis tool. Mean distance and integrated distance served as main parameters for surface and volume comparison. Point comparison served as an additional parameter. Statistical analysis was carried out using t-test for unconnected samples. Considering mean distance and integrated distance as main parameters for 3D evaluation of the scanner's accuracy, FS and IOS differ significantly in their metric precision in scanning the cleft model compared to the reference. The IOS proved to be significantly more accurate than the FS compared to the previously described stationary 3D scanner as reference and validated baseline. Further validation of the tested IOS and FS for 3D assessment of the nasolabial region is presented by adding the previously validated ATOS III Triple Scan blue light scanner as a reference. The IOS shows, compared to a validated baseline scan, significantly higher metric precision in experimental cleft model scanning. The collected data provides a basis for clinical application of the IOS for 3D assessment of the nasolabial region.

Indexed as

Cleft LipCleft PalateComputer-Aided DesignData CollectionHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalLip

Identifiers

PMID37500683
PMCPMC10374634
OpenAlexW4385298747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.