János König, Kata Kelemen, László Márk Czumbel, Bence Szabó, Gábor Varga, Judit Borbély, Orsolya Németh, Péter Hegyi, Péter Hermann
{"title":"光学扫描在面部修复中的应用现状:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"János König, Kata Kelemen, László Márk Czumbel, Bence Szabó, Gábor Varga, Judit Borbély, Orsolya Németh, Péter Hegyi, Péter Hermann","doi":"10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To assess the accuracy of scanning technologies for constructing facial prostheses on human faces.Study selection Our systematic search was performed on five databases. Studies reporting on human volunteers (P) whose faces were scanned with a scanning technology were eligible. The anthropometrical interlandmark distances (ILDs) were used as indicators of accuracy; the ILDs are measured on the virtual models (I) and directly on the faces (C). The virtual models deviated from their true values (O). Studies reporting the measurements on patients with or without facial deformities were included, but cadavers or inanimate objects were reasons for exclusion. We performed a mean difference (MD) / standardized MD analysis with a random effect model. The difficulties regarding the scanning procedure mentioned in the articles were also assessed.Results We found 3723 records after duplicate removal. Twenty five articles were eligible for the qualitative review, and ten articles were included in the quantitative synthesis. Eight different ILDs were compared in MD analyses. The differences were between -0.54-0.43 mm. We also performed a regional three-dimensional analysis to compare scanning technologies in each major region. No significant differences were found in any of the regions and axes. The most mentioned difficulties were artifacts due to motion or blinking.Conclusions The results suggest no systematic skew in linear dimensions neither between direct caliper measurements nor between measurements on the scanned models, scanning technologies, or facial regions.</p>","PeriodicalId":16887,"journal":{"name":"Journal of prosthodontic research","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Current status of optical scanning in facial prosthetics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"János König, Kata Kelemen, László Márk Czumbel, Bence Szabó, Gábor Varga, Judit Borbély, Orsolya Németh, Péter Hegyi, Péter Hermann\",\"doi\":\"10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Purpose To assess the accuracy of scanning technologies for constructing facial prostheses on human faces.Study selection Our systematic search was performed on five databases. Studies reporting on human volunteers (P) whose faces were scanned with a scanning technology were eligible. The anthropometrical interlandmark distances (ILDs) were used as indicators of accuracy; the ILDs are measured on the virtual models (I) and directly on the faces (C). The virtual models deviated from their true values (O). Studies reporting the measurements on patients with or without facial deformities were included, but cadavers or inanimate objects were reasons for exclusion. We performed a mean difference (MD) / standardized MD analysis with a random effect model. The difficulties regarding the scanning procedure mentioned in the articles were also assessed.Results We found 3723 records after duplicate removal. Twenty five articles were eligible for the qualitative review, and ten articles were included in the quantitative synthesis. Eight different ILDs were compared in MD analyses. The differences were between -0.54-0.43 mm. We also performed a regional three-dimensional analysis to compare scanning technologies in each major region. No significant differences were found in any of the regions and axes. The most mentioned difficulties were artifacts due to motion or blinking.Conclusions The results suggest no systematic skew in linear dimensions neither between direct caliper measurements nor between measurements on the scanned models, scanning technologies, or facial regions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16887,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of prosthodontic research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of prosthodontic research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00221\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/6/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of prosthodontic research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00221","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Current status of optical scanning in facial prosthetics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Purpose To assess the accuracy of scanning technologies for constructing facial prostheses on human faces.Study selection Our systematic search was performed on five databases. Studies reporting on human volunteers (P) whose faces were scanned with a scanning technology were eligible. The anthropometrical interlandmark distances (ILDs) were used as indicators of accuracy; the ILDs are measured on the virtual models (I) and directly on the faces (C). The virtual models deviated from their true values (O). Studies reporting the measurements on patients with or without facial deformities were included, but cadavers or inanimate objects were reasons for exclusion. We performed a mean difference (MD) / standardized MD analysis with a random effect model. The difficulties regarding the scanning procedure mentioned in the articles were also assessed.Results We found 3723 records after duplicate removal. Twenty five articles were eligible for the qualitative review, and ten articles were included in the quantitative synthesis. Eight different ILDs were compared in MD analyses. The differences were between -0.54-0.43 mm. We also performed a regional three-dimensional analysis to compare scanning technologies in each major region. No significant differences were found in any of the regions and axes. The most mentioned difficulties were artifacts due to motion or blinking.Conclusions The results suggest no systematic skew in linear dimensions neither between direct caliper measurements nor between measurements on the scanned models, scanning technologies, or facial regions.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Prosthodontic Research is published 4 times annually, in January, April, July, and October, under supervision by the Editorial Board of Japan Prosthodontic Society, which selects all materials submitted for publication.
Journal of Prosthodontic Research originated as an official journal of Japan Prosthodontic Society. It has recently developed a long-range plan to become the most prestigious Asian journal of dental research regarding all aspects of oral and occlusal rehabilitation, fixed/removable prosthodontics, oral implantology and applied oral biology and physiology. The Journal will cover all diagnostic and clinical management aspects necessary to reestablish subjective and objective harmonious oral aesthetics and function.
The most-targeted topics:
1) Clinical Epidemiology and Prosthodontics
2) Fixed/Removable Prosthodontics
3) Oral Implantology
4) Prosthodontics-Related Biosciences (Regenerative Medicine, Bone Biology, Mechanobiology, Microbiology/Immunology)
5) Oral Physiology and Biomechanics (Masticating and Swallowing Function, Parafunction, e.g., bruxism)
6) Orofacial Pain and Temporomandibular Disorders (TMDs)
7) Adhesive Dentistry / Dental Materials / Aesthetic Dentistry
8) Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Dysphagia Rehabilitation
9) Digital Dentistry
Prosthodontic treatment may become necessary as a result of developmental or acquired disturbances in the orofacial region, of orofacial trauma, or of a variety of dental and oral diseases and orofacial pain conditions.
Reviews, Original articles, technical procedure and case reports can be submitted. Letters to the Editor commenting on papers or any aspect of Journal of Prosthodontic Research are welcomed.