Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 12, 2025
Digital Hybrid Model Preparation for Virtual Planning of Reconstructive Dentoalveolar Surgical Procedures
Published on: August 5, 2021
Comparative analysis of 3D tomography based soft tissue rendering and Proface facial scanning systems in orthognathic
Merve Öztürk Muhtar1, Sabahat Zeynep Yey Özkeskin1, Erol Cansız2
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey.
Purpose:
This study aimed to investigate the linear and angular differences in the nasolabial soft tissue in patients who underwent bimaxillary orthognathic surgery using two different three-dimensional imaging methods. Furthermore, the advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of these methods were determined after comparing the data obtained from the imaging methods used in the study.
Materials And Methods:
Preoperative (T0) and 6-months postoperative (T1) cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and three-dimensional facial scanning (3DFS) data from 22 patients who underwent maxillary advancement surgery were examined. The DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) data (CBCT group) and ".obj" format images (3DFS group) of the patients were analyzed using Dolphin software (Dolphin Imaging®, Version 12, Chatsworth, CA, USA). The linear and angular soft tissue measurements were calculated after determining the reference anatomical landmarks for both groups.
Results:
Measurements with CBCT and 3DFS imaging methods were compared at T0, T1, and all measurements (T0+T1). No statistically significant difference was observed between the CBCT and 3DFS groups for five measurements performed at T0 and T0+T1, but statistically significant differences were observed between the groups for the other seven measurements. There was no statistically significant difference between the CBCT and 3DFS groups for six measurements at T1, but there were statistically significant differences between the groups for the other six measurements. After reviewing the postoperative differences in the nasolabial soft tissue, a statistically significant increase in four linear and one angular measurement in the 3DFS group was observed, and there was a statistically significant increase in two linear and two angular measurements in the CBCT group. Upon comparison of postoperative differences in soft tissue alterations, no statistically significant difference between the 3DFS group and the CBCT group were observed in any of the soft tissue measurements.
Conclusion:
Orthognathic surgery has significant effects on nose width and upper lip morphology. Although both 3DFS and CBCT methods can be used to evaluate such effects, the results of the present study revealed differences in sensitivity and limitations between the two methods. Thus, surgical outcomes should be evaluated in consideration of the abovementioned parameters.
