Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40416065›Full record

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.

Mauranne Lievens, Lisa De Kock, Matthias Ureel, Geert Villeirs, Wim Van Paepegem, Renaat Coopman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Mauranne LievensDepartment of Oral & Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; mauranne.lievens@ugent.be (M.L.); matthias.ureel@uzgent.be (M.U.).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1926-4893
Lisa De KockDepartment of Oral & Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; mauranne.lievens@ugent.be (M.L.); matthias.ureel@uzgent.be (M.U.).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1031-5239
Matthias UreelDepartment of Oral & Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; mauranne.lievens@ugent.be (M.L.); matthias.ureel@uzgent.be (M.U.).
Geert VilleirsDepartment of Medical Imaging, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; geert.villeirs@uzgent.be.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9073-3341
Wim Van PaepegemDepartment of Materials, Textiles and Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; wim.vanpaepegem@ugent.be.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0672-3675
Renaat CoopmanDepartment of Oral & Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; mauranne.lievens@ugent.be (M.L.); matthias.ureel@uzgent.be (M.U.).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0580-9074

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

3D modelCT scandigitizationmedical device regulationoptical scanner

Identifiers

PMID40416065
PMCPMC12101235

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.