The effect of imaging programs and segmentation methods on the accuracy of volume measurements of teeth.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated whether there are differences between software programs, voxel sizes, segmentation techniques, and intraoral scanners in terms of volume measurement in incisor teeth.

STUDY DESIGN

Thirty extracted teeth were scanned using a 3D intraoral scanner. Physical volumes were measured using the water displacement method (WDM) as the gold standard. Cone beam computed tomography images were taken at two voxel sizes (0.3-0.4 mm voxel). The volumes of the teeth were calculated using the manual segmentation technique in the 3D Doctor and ImageJ (Fiji) Program, manual and automatic segmentation methods in the ITK-Snap program, and automatic segmentation methods in the 3D Slicer program. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, v 20.0).

RESULTS

There is a significant difference between WDM and 3D Doctor volume measurements at the voxel size of 0.4 mm (P < .05). The 3D Doctor program showed more than 13% difference compared to the WDM. There is no significant difference between WDM, intraoral scanner, ITK-Snap, ImageJ (Fiji), 3D Slicer, and 3D-Doctor volume measurements at the voxel size of 0.3 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurements with manual segmentation in ITK-Snap and ImageJ programs give the closest results to the physical volume measurements of the teeth. The automatic segmentation method in ITK-Snap and 3D Slicer programs may be preferred due to its ease of use and less time-consuming. In the 3D Doctor software, volume measurements tend to increase with larger voxel size.