The Accuracy of an Optical White Light Desktop 3D Scanner and Cone Beam CT Scanner Compared to a Multi-Slice CT Scanner to Digitize Anatomical 3D Models: A Pilot Study

Additive manufacturing, in combination with virtual surgery planning, leads to the predictability of complex surgical cases. To guarantee patient safety, three-dimensional (3D) print quality must be ensured and verified. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of an optical white-light desktop scanner (OWLDS) and a cone beam CT (CBCT) scanner to that of a multi-slice CT scanner (MSCT) for scanning and digitizing 3D anatomical models. Twenty-two removable parts of a CE-certified anatomical skull, used as a patient-specific surrogate in a clinical workflow, were each scanned by MSCT, CBCT, and OWLDS scanners. The accuracy of the scanning modalities was investigated through a part comparison analysis of the stereolithography (STL) files derived from the different scanning modalities. The high-resolution OWLDS STL files show the smallest overall surface match deviation, at 0.04 mm, compared to the MSCT STL files. The CBCT STL files show an overall deviation of 0.07 mm compared to the MSCT STL files. This difference between the scan modalities increases as the volume of anatomical models decreases. The OWLDS is a safe, cost-effective, user-friendly, and highly accurate scanning modality suitable for accuracy evaluation during the manufacturing process of in-house 3D models. For smaller models, high-resolution optical scans are recommended.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction
Published
2025-04-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cmtr18020027
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Anatomy and Medical Technology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.67

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Accuracy of an Optical White Light Desktop 3D Scanner and Cone Beam CT Scanner Compared to a Multi-Slice CT Scanner to Digitize Anatomical 3D Models: A Pilot Study

Geert Villeirs, Wim Van Paepegem, Renaat Coopman, Lisa De Kock et al.
1 citations
Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction
Anatomy and Medical Technology
0.67
article

The Accuracy of an Optical White Light Desktop 3D Scanner and Cone Beam CT Scanner Compared to a Multi-Slice CT Scanner to Digitize Anatomical 3D Models: A Pilot Study

Geert Villeirs, Wim Van Paepegem, Renaat Coopman, Lisa De Kock, Mauranne Lievens, Matthias Ureel
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Additive manufacturing, in combination with virtual surgery planning, leads to the predictability of complex surgical cases. To guarantee patient safety, three-dimensional (3D) print quality must be ensured and verified. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of an optical white-light desktop scanner (OWLDS) and a cone beam CT (CBCT) scanner to that of a multi-slice CT scanner (MSCT) for scanning and digitizing 3D anatomical models. Twenty-two removable parts of a CE-certified anatomical skull, used as a patient-specific surrogate in a clinical workflow, were each scanned by MSCT, CBCT, and OWLDS scanners. The accuracy of the scanning modalities was investigated through a part comparison analysis of the stereolithography (STL) files derived from the different scanning modalities. The high-resolution OWLDS STL files show the smallest overall surface match deviation, at 0.04 mm, compared to the MSCT STL files. The CBCT STL files show an overall deviation of 0.07 mm compared to the MSCT STL files. This difference between the scan modalities increases as the volume of anatomical models decreases. The OWLDS is a safe, cost-effective, user-friendly, and highly accurate scanning modality suitable for accuracy evaluation during the manufacturing process of in-house 3D models. For smaller models, high-resolution optical scans are recommended.

Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & ReconstructionVol. 18(2)
Ghent University Hospital (BE), Ghent University (BE)
Universitair Ziekenhuis Gent, Universiteit Gent
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
Anatomy and Medical Technology
0.67
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.