Social smile reproducibility using 3-D stereophotogrammetry and reverse engineering technology

• Published in: The Angle orthodontist Vol. 86; no. 3; pp. 448 - 455
• Main Authors: Dindaroğlu, Furkan, Duran, Gökhan Serhat, Görgülü, Serkan, Yetkiner, Enver
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Edward H. Angle Society of Orthodontists 01.05.2016
• Subjects: Adolescent; Dentistry; Female; Humans; Male; Original; Photogrammetry; Reproducibility of Results; Smiling; Software; Reproducibility; Reverse engineering; Social smile
• ISSN: 0003-3219; 1945-7103
• DOI: 10.2319/040915-236.1

To assess the range of social smile reproducibility using 3-D stereophotogrammetry and reverse engineering technology. Social smile images of white adolescents (N  =  15, mean age  =  15.4 ±1.5 years; range  =  14-17 years) were obtained using 3dMDFlex (3dMD, Atlanta, Ga). Each participant was asked to produce 16 social smiles at 3-minute intervals. All images were obtained in natural head position. Alignment of images, segmentation of smile area, and 3-D deviation analysis were carried out using Geomagic Control software (3D Systems Inc, Cary, NC). A single image was taken as a reference, and the remaining 15 images were compared with the reference image to evaluate positive and negative deviations. The differences between the mean deviation limits of participants with the highest and the lowest deviations and the total mean deviations were evaluated using Bland-Altman Plots. Minimum and maximum deviations of a single image from the reference image were 0.34 and 2.69 mm, respectively. Lowest deviation between two images was within 0.5 mm and 1.54 mm among all participants (mean, 0.96 ± 0.21 mm), and the highest deviation was between 0.41 mm and 2.69 mm (mean, 1.53 ± 0.46 mm). For a single patient, when all alignments were considered together, the mean deviation was between 0.32 ± 0.10 mm and 0.59 ± 0.24 mm. Mean deviation for one image was between 0.14 and 1.21 mm. The range of reproducibility of the social smile presented individual variability, but this variation was not clinically significant or detectable under routine clinical observation.