ArticleCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2025
The Accuracy of an Optical White Light Desktop 3D Scanner and Cone Beam CT Scanner Compared to a Multi-Slice CT Scanner to Digitize Anatomical 3D Models: A Pilot Study.
Article in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Combined BTX-A and Collagen Membrane in Benign Parotid Enucleation: A Comparative Cohort Study.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Additive manufacturing, in combination with virtual surgery planning, leads to the predictability of complex surgical cases. To guarantee patient safety, three-dimensional (3D) print quality must be ensured and verified. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of an optical white-light desktop scanner (OWLDS) and a cone beam CT (CBCT) scanner to that of a multi-slice CT scanner (MSCT) for scanning and digitizing 3D anatomical models. Twenty-two removable parts of a CE-certified anatomical skull, used as a patient-specific surrogate in a clinical workflow, were each scanned by MSCT, CBCT, and OWLDS scanners. The accuracy of the scanning modalities was investigated through a part comparison analysis of the stereolithography (STL) files derived from the different scanning modalities. The high-resolution OWLDS STL files show the smallest overall surface match deviation, at 0.04 mm, compared to the MSCT STL files. The CBCT STL files show an overall deviation of 0.07 mm compared to the MSCT STL files. This difference between the scan modalities increases as the volume of anatomical models decreases. The OWLDS is a safe, cost-effective, user-friendly, and highly accurate scanning modality suitable for accuracy evaluation during the manufacturing process of in-house 3D models. For smaller models, high-resolution optical scans are recommended.
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.