ArticleBMC oral health2024
Evaluation of CBCT reconstructed tooth models at different thresholds and voxels and their accuracy in fusion with IOS data: an in vitro validation study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparisons of artificial intelligence automated segmentation techniques to manual segmentation techniques of the maxilla and maxillary sinus for CT or cone-beam CT scans-a systematic review.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Progress of Multimodal Imaging: Bridging Orthodontics to Comprehensive Oral Multidisciplinary Care.International dental journal · 2026Review
- CBCT-based quantification of intrabony root volumes in adult natural teeth: An exploratory study.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2026Article
- Bioengineered Teeth and Regenerative Strategies: Advances in Tissue Engineering and Stem Cell Applications.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Article
- Comparative Analysis of Artifact Expression in Zirconia and Graphene Crowns in CBCT Images From Different Systems.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Study on the reproducibility of the Frankfort horizontal plane based on CBCT 3D reconstruction and comparative analysis with lateral radiographs.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Accuracy and reliability of 3D cephalometric landmark detection with deep learning.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Accuracy and reliability of a three-dimensional superimposition method for maxillary jaws and dentition.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comparison of dental surface of canine teeth in dogs after crown preparation using CBCT-based surface reconstruction or conventional dental impression materials.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to evaluate the impact of different thresholds and voxel sizes on the accuracy of Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) tooth reconstruction and to assess the accuracy of fused CBCT and intraoral scanning (IOS) tooth models using curvature continuity algorithms under varying thresholds and voxel conditions.
methodsThirty-two isolated teeth were digitized using IOS and CBCT at two voxel sizes and five threshold settings. Crown-root fusion was performed using a curvature continuity algorithm. Volume, surface area, and crown width of tooth models were compared to laser scanning models, and RMS error was measured. Data were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test, paired t-test, and one-way ANOVA.
resultsVolume amplification errors of CBCT with 0.15 mm and 0.3 mm voxels ranged from 1.22 to 19.07%, surface area errors from 0.18 to 7.78%, crown linearity errors ranged from 2.47 to 7.69%, root linearity errors ranged from - 1.02 to 2.26% and RMS from 0.0691 mm to 0.2408 mm. Crown-root fusion of IOS and CBCT data reduced volume error to -0.90-5.10%, surface area error to -0.66-4.15%, and RMS to 0.0359 mm to 0.0945 mm.
conclusionsVoxel size and threshold settings significantly affect the accuracy of CBCT reconstruction and crown-root fusion. Smaller voxel sizes yield higher reconstruction precision, and different voxel sizes and tooth regions correspond to distinct optimal segmentation thresholds. The validated semi-automated crown-root fusion algorithm significantly enhances overall model accuracy, offering new possibilities for clinical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.