Vincenzo Ronsivalle, Piero Venezia, Marco Migliorati, Cristina Grippaudo, Ersilia Barbato, Ludovica Nucci, Gaetano Isola, Rosalia Leonardi, Antonino Lo Giudice
{"title":"Accuracy of imaging software usable in clinical settings for 3D rendering of tooth structures.","authors":"Vincenzo Ronsivalle, Piero Venezia, Marco Migliorati, Cristina Grippaudo, Ersilia Barbato, Ludovica Nucci, Gaetano Isola, Rosalia Leonardi, Antonino Lo Giudice","doi":"10.3290/j.ijcd.b4140897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of the present study was to evaluate the segmentation accuracy of the dentition by testing four open-source semi-automatic software programs.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty CBCT scans were selected to perform semi-automatic segmentation of the maxillary and mandibular dentition. The software programs tested were InVesalius, ITK-SNAP, 3D Slicer, and Seg3D. In addition, each tooth model was manually segmented using Mimics software; this was set as the gold standard (GS) reference of the investigation. A specific 3D imaging technology was used to perform the superimposition between the tooth models obtained with the semi-automatic software and the GS model as well as to perform the surface-to-surface matching analysis. The accuracy of semi-automatic segmentation was evaluated, calculating the volumetric mean differences (mean bias and limits of agreement) and the percentage of matching of the tooth models compared with the manual segmentation (GS). Qualitative assessments were performed using color-coded maps. All data were statistically analyzed to perform comparisons between the investigated software programs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Statistically significant differences were found in the volumetric and matching percentage data (P 0.05). InVesalius was the most accurate software program for 3D rendering of the dentition, with a volumetric bias (Mimics software) ranging from 4.59 to 85.79 mm3, while ITK-SNAP showed the highest volumetric bias, ranging from 30.22 to 319.83 mm3. The mismatched area was mainly located at the radicular tooth region. The volumetric data showed excellent inter-software reliability, with coefficient values ranging from 0.951 to 0.997.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Different semi-automatic software algorithms could generate different patterns of inaccuracy error in the segmentation of teeth.</p>","PeriodicalId":48666,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Computerized Dentistry","volume":"0 0","pages":"235-250"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Computerized Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.ijcd.b4140897","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the segmentation accuracy of the dentition by testing four open-source semi-automatic software programs.
Materials and methods: Twenty CBCT scans were selected to perform semi-automatic segmentation of the maxillary and mandibular dentition. The software programs tested were InVesalius, ITK-SNAP, 3D Slicer, and Seg3D. In addition, each tooth model was manually segmented using Mimics software; this was set as the gold standard (GS) reference of the investigation. A specific 3D imaging technology was used to perform the superimposition between the tooth models obtained with the semi-automatic software and the GS model as well as to perform the surface-to-surface matching analysis. The accuracy of semi-automatic segmentation was evaluated, calculating the volumetric mean differences (mean bias and limits of agreement) and the percentage of matching of the tooth models compared with the manual segmentation (GS). Qualitative assessments were performed using color-coded maps. All data were statistically analyzed to perform comparisons between the investigated software programs.
Results: Statistically significant differences were found in the volumetric and matching percentage data (P 0.05). InVesalius was the most accurate software program for 3D rendering of the dentition, with a volumetric bias (Mimics software) ranging from 4.59 to 85.79 mm3, while ITK-SNAP showed the highest volumetric bias, ranging from 30.22 to 319.83 mm3. The mismatched area was mainly located at the radicular tooth region. The volumetric data showed excellent inter-software reliability, with coefficient values ranging from 0.951 to 0.997.
Conclusion: Different semi-automatic software algorithms could generate different patterns of inaccuracy error in the segmentation of teeth.
期刊介绍:
This journal explores the myriad innovations in the emerging field of computerized dentistry and how to integrate them into clinical practice. The bulk of the journal is devoted to the science of computer-assisted dentistry, with research articles and clinical reports on all aspects of computer-based diagnostic and therapeutic applications, with special emphasis placed on CAD/CAM and image-processing systems. Articles also address the use of computer-based communication to support patient care, assess the quality of care, and enhance clinical decision making. The journal is presented in a bilingual format, with each issue offering three types of articles: science-based, application-based, and national society reports.