- •Three-dimensional (3D) modeling of orthodontic dental casts can be accomplished by smartphone-based stereophotogrammetry.
- •The accuracy of virtual orthodontic dental casts produced by smartphone-based stereophotogrammetry was about 0.34 mm, and the error of repeated 3D models using this method was 0.03 mm.
- •Stereophotogrammetry using smartphone devices is a simple and low-cost technology for the 3D modeling of orthodontic dental casts.
- •This method is a helpful low-cost tool for the digital archiving of dental casts, eliminating physical storage shortcomings, such as broken models and space requirements.
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists
- British Orthodontic Society's initiative on orthodontic retention, a GDP's perspective.Br Dent J. 2018; 224: 481-486
- Storage of orthodontic study models in hospital units in the U.K.Br J Orthod. 1992; 19: 227-232
- Digital versus plaster study models: how accurate and reproducible are they?.J Orthod. 2012; 39: 151-159
- Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144: 471-478
- Orthodontic scanners: what's available?.J Orthod. 2015; 42: 136-143
- Integration and application of multimodal measurement techniques: relevance of photogrammetry to orthodontics.Sensors (Basel). 2021; 21: 8026
- Photogrammetry as an alternative for acquiring digital dental models: a proof of concept.Med Hypotheses. 2019; 128: 43-49
- Digital dental models: is photogrammetry an alternative to dental extraoral and intraoral scanners?.Dent J (Basel). 2022; 10: 1-15
- A critical assessment of the potential for Structure-from-Motion photogrammetry to produce high fidelity 3D dental models.Am J Phys Anthropol. 2020; 173: 381-392
- Concurrent validity and reliability of cephalometric analysis using smartphone apps and computer software.Angle Orthod. 2019; 89: 889-896
- The reliability and reproducibility of an android cephalometric smartphone application in comparison with the conventional method.Angle Orthod. 2021; 91: 236-242
- Accuracy of a smartphone-based orthodontic treatment-monitoring application: a pilot study.Angle Orthod. 2019; 89: 727-733
- Accuracy of capturing nasal, orbital, and auricular defects with extra- and intraoral optical scanners and smartphone: an in vitro study.J Dent. 2022; 117103916
- Monoscopic photogrammetry to obtain 3D models by a mobile device: a method for making facial prostheses.J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016; 45: 33
- A method for economical smartphone-based clinical 3D facial scanning.J Prosthodont. 2020; 29: 818-825
- Smartphone-based photogrammetric 3D modelling assessment by comparison with radiological medical imaging for cranial deformation analysis.Measurement. 2019; 131: 372-379
- State-of-the-art three-dimensional analysis of soft tissue changes following Le Fort I maxillary advancement.Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 54: 812-817
- The accuracy of conformation of a generic surface mesh for the analysis of facial soft tissue changes.PLoS One. 2016; 11e0152381
- Accuracy of generic mesh conformation: the future of facial morphological analysis.JPRAS Open. 2017; 14: 39-48
- A comparison between dental measurements taken from CBCT models and those taken from a Digital Method.Eur J Orthod. 2013; 35: 1-6
- Trueness of cone beam computed tomography versus intra-oral scanner derived three-dimensional digital models: an ex vivo study.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019; 30: 498-504
- Comparative evaluation of digitization of diagnostic dental cast (plaster) models using different scanning technologies.Dent J (Basel). 2020; 8: 79
- Linear measurements using virtual study models.Angle Orthod. 2012; 82: 1098-1106
- Current methods of assessing the accuracy of three-dimensional soft tissue facial predictions: technical and clinical considerations.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015; 44: 132-138
- Assessment of regional asymmetry of the face before and after surgical correction of unilateral cleft lip.J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2018; 46: 974-978
- The evaluation of Cloudcompare software in the process of TLS the evaluation of Cloudcompare software in the process of TLS point clouds registration.RevCAD J Geod Cadastar. 2016; 21: 117-124
- A comparison of trueness and precision of 12 3D printers used in dentistry.BDJ Open. 2022; 8: 14
- Three-dimensional analysis of lip changes in response to simulated maxillary incisor advancement.Angle Orthod. 2020; 90: 118-124
- Impact of orthodontic brackets on intraoral and extraoral scans.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2022; 162: 208-213
- Assessment of simulated vs actual orthodontic tooth movement with a customized fixed lingual appliance using untreated posterior teeth for registration and digital superimposition: a retrospective study.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2022; 161: 272-280
- Scanning accuracy of nondental structured light extraoral scanners compared with that of a dental-specific scanner.J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 126: 110-114
- Accuracy of laser-scanned models compared to plaster models and cone-beam computed tomography.Angle Orthod. 2014; 84: 443-450
- Three-dimensional analysis of digital models generated from intraoral, extraoral, and CBCT scanning devices.J Dent Maxillofac Res. 2019; 2: 1-7
- Dental measurements and Bolton index reliability and accuracy obtained from 2D digital, 3D segmented CBCT, and 3d intraoral laser scanner.J Clin Exp Dent. 2017; 9: e1466-e1473
Funding: This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under the grant number 82000996.
Competing interests: Authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. None declared.
Provenance and peer review: Non-commissioned and externally peer reviewed.