• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Materials >One Step before 3D Printing—Evaluation of Imaging Software Accuracy for 3-Dimensional Analysis of the Mandible: A Comparative Study Using a Surface-to-Surface Matching Technique
【2h】

One Step before 3D Printing—Evaluation of Imaging Software Accuracy for 3-Dimensional Analysis of the Mandible: A Comparative Study Using a Surface-to-Surface Matching Technique

机译：3D打印之前的一个步骤-下颌3维分析的成像软件准确性评估：使用表面到表面匹配技术的比较研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The accuracy of 3D reconstructions of the craniomaxillofacial region using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is important for the morphological evaluation of specific anatomical structures. Moreover, an accurate segmentation process is fundamental for the physical reconstruction of the anatomy (3D printing) when a preliminary simulation of the therapy is required. In this regard, the objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of four different types of software for the semiautomatic segmentation of the mandibular jaw compared to manual segmentation, used as a gold standard. Twenty cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) with a manual approach (Mimics) and a semi-automatic approach (Invesalius, ITK-Snap, Dolphin 3D, Slicer 3D) were selected for the segmentation of the mandible in the present study. The accuracy of semi-automatic segmentation was evaluated: (1) by comparing the mandibular volumes obtained with semi-automatic 3D rendering and manual segmentation and (2) by deviation analysis between the two mandibular models. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate differences in mandibular volumetric recordings and for a deviation analysis among the different software types used. Linear regression was also performed between manual and semi-automatic methods. No significant differences were found in the total volumes among the obtained 3D mandibular models (Mimics = 40.85 cm , ITK-Snap = 40.81 cm , Invesalius = 40.04 cm , Dolphin 3D = 42.03 cm , Slicer 3D = 40.58 cm ). High correlations were found between the semi-automatic segmentation and manual segmentation approach, with R coefficients ranging from 0,960 to 0,992. According to the deviation analysis, the mandibular models obtained with ITK-Snap showed the highest matching percentage (Tolerance A = 88.44%, Tolerance B = 97.30%), while those obtained with Dolphin 3D showed the lowest matching percentage (Tolerance A = 60.01%, Tolerance B = 87.76%) ( < 0.05). Colour-coded maps showed that the area of greatest mismatch between semi-automatic and manual segmentation was the condylar region and the region proximate to the dental roots. Despite the fact that the semi-automatic segmentation of the mandible showed, in general, high reliability and high correlation with the manual segmentation, caution should be taken when evaluating the morphological and dimensional characteristics of the condyles either on CBCT-derived digital models or physical models (3D printing).
机译：使用锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）对颅颌面部区域进行3D重建的准确性对于特定解剖结构的形态学评估非常重要。此外，当需要对治疗进行初步模拟时，精确的分割过程对于解剖结构的物理重建（3D打印）至关重要。在这方面，本研究的目的是评估四种不同类型的软件与用于黄金分割标准的手动分割相比，半自动分割下颌颚的准确性。在本研究中，选择了采用手动方法（Mimics）和半自动方法（Invesalius，ITK-Snap，Dolphin 3D，Slicer 3D）的二十个锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）。评估半自动分割的准确性：（1）通过比较使用半自动3D渲染和手动分割获得的下颌骨体积，以及（2）通过两个下颌模型之间的偏差分析。方差分析（ANOVA）用于评估下颌骨容积记录中的差异以及所使用的不同软件类型之间的偏差分析。手动和半自动方法之间也进行了线性回归。在获得的3D下颌模型之间的总体积中没有发现显着差异（Mimics = 40.85 cm，ITK-Snap = 40.81 cm，Invesalius = 40.04 cm，Dolphin 3D = 42.03 cm，Slicer 3D = 40.58 cm）。在半自动分割和手动分割方法之间发现高度相关，R系数介于0,960到0,992之间。根据偏差分析，ITK-Snap获得的下颌模型显示出最高的匹配百分比（公差A = 88.44％，公差B = 97.30％），而使用Dolphin 3D获得的下颌模型显示出最低的匹配百分比（公差A = 60.01％ ，公差B = 87.76％）（<0.05）。颜色编码图显示，半自动和手动分割之间最大的不匹配区域是con突区域和靠近牙根的区域。尽管下颌骨的半自动分割显示出较高的可靠性和与手动分割的高度相关性，但在基于CBCT的数字模型或物理方式评估evaluating的形态和尺寸特征时仍应谨慎模型（3D打印）。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号