Evaluation of the accuracy (trueness, precision) and processing time of different 3-dimensional CAD software programs and algorithms for virtual cast alignment.
Wenceslao Piedra-Cascón, Xavier Paolo Burgos-Artizzu, Óscar González Martín, Carlos Oteo-Morilla, Jose Manuel Pose-Rodriguez, Mercedes Gallas-Torreira
{"title":"Evaluation of the accuracy (trueness, precision) and processing time of different 3-dimensional CAD software programs and algorithms for virtual cast alignment.","authors":"Wenceslao Piedra-Cascón, Xavier Paolo Burgos-Artizzu, Óscar González Martín, Carlos Oteo-Morilla, Jose Manuel Pose-Rodriguez, Mercedes Gallas-Torreira","doi":"10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the impact of different alignment algorithms and CAD software programs on alignment accuracy (trueness and precision) and processing time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mandibular typodont was digitized using a laboratory scanner (L2i) to obtain a reference STL (STLr) file. It was then scanned with an intraoral scanner (Primescan) and digitally duplicated ten times (n=10). Each scan was aligned with the STLr using 42 combinations of 3D CAD software and alignment algorithms. The tested software programs included Blender for Dental, BlueSkyPlan, Dental CAD App (Exocad), Medit Design, NemoSmile, and Meshmixer. Alignment accuracy (trueness and precision) and processing time were recorded using Python software (v3.8). Statistical analysis was performed with a two-way ANOVA test (α = .01) to identify overall differences, followed by a post hoc Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test (α = .05) to establish rankings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences in alignment accuracy were observed based on the software and algorithm used, affecting both trueness (p<.01) and precision (p<.01). Processing time also varied significantly (p<.01). Post hoc analysis identified the optimal algorithm for each software, revealing variations in trueness, precision, and processing time among the optimal versions. Medit Design achieved the best overall performance by combining high accuracy with the fastest processing time, while Meshmixer exhibited the lowest accuracy due to its lack of advanced algorithms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The choice of CAD software and alignment algorithm significantly influences alignment accuracy and efficiency. Best-fit and section-based provided the best results, offering valuable insights into the optimization of digital workflows in prosthodontics.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Alignment protocols must be tailored to the specific CAD software program used, as no universal protocol was effective across all tested software. Optimizing alignment protocols reduces errors, enhances prosthodontic outcomes, and improves the reliability and efficiency of clinical and laboratory workflows, ultimately ensuring better patient care and treatment success.</p>","PeriodicalId":15585,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dentistry","volume":" ","pages":"105619"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105619","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the impact of different alignment algorithms and CAD software programs on alignment accuracy (trueness and precision) and processing time.
Methods: A mandibular typodont was digitized using a laboratory scanner (L2i) to obtain a reference STL (STLr) file. It was then scanned with an intraoral scanner (Primescan) and digitally duplicated ten times (n=10). Each scan was aligned with the STLr using 42 combinations of 3D CAD software and alignment algorithms. The tested software programs included Blender for Dental, BlueSkyPlan, Dental CAD App (Exocad), Medit Design, NemoSmile, and Meshmixer. Alignment accuracy (trueness and precision) and processing time were recorded using Python software (v3.8). Statistical analysis was performed with a two-way ANOVA test (α = .01) to identify overall differences, followed by a post hoc Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test (α = .05) to establish rankings.
Results: Significant differences in alignment accuracy were observed based on the software and algorithm used, affecting both trueness (p<.01) and precision (p<.01). Processing time also varied significantly (p<.01). Post hoc analysis identified the optimal algorithm for each software, revealing variations in trueness, precision, and processing time among the optimal versions. Medit Design achieved the best overall performance by combining high accuracy with the fastest processing time, while Meshmixer exhibited the lowest accuracy due to its lack of advanced algorithms.
Conclusions: The choice of CAD software and alignment algorithm significantly influences alignment accuracy and efficiency. Best-fit and section-based provided the best results, offering valuable insights into the optimization of digital workflows in prosthodontics.
Clinical significance: Alignment protocols must be tailored to the specific CAD software program used, as no universal protocol was effective across all tested software. Optimizing alignment protocols reduces errors, enhances prosthodontic outcomes, and improves the reliability and efficiency of clinical and laboratory workflows, ultimately ensuring better patient care and treatment success.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Dentistry has an open access mirror journal The Journal of Dentistry: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review.
The Journal of Dentistry is the leading international dental journal within the field of Restorative Dentistry. Placing an emphasis on publishing novel and high-quality research papers, the Journal aims to influence the practice of dentistry at clinician, research, industry and policy-maker level on an international basis.
Topics covered include the management of dental disease, periodontology, endodontology, operative dentistry, fixed and removable prosthodontics, dental biomaterials science, long-term clinical trials including epidemiology and oral health, technology transfer of new scientific instrumentation or procedures, as well as clinically relevant oral biology and translational research.
The Journal of Dentistry will publish original scientific research papers including short communications. It is also interested in publishing review articles and leaders in themed areas which will be linked to new scientific research. Conference proceedings are also welcome and expressions of interest should be communicated to the Editor.