This application incorporates by reference herein the entire disclosure of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/702,360, filed on Oct. 30, 2000.
The present invention is related generally to the field of orthodontics, and more particularly to systems and methods for bite-setting teeth models.
One objective in orthodontics is to move a patient's teeth to positions where the teeth function optimally and aesthetically. Conventionally, appliances such as braces are applied to the teeth of the patient by an orthodontist. Each appliance exerts continual force on the teeth and gradually urges the teeth toward their ideal positions. Over a period of time, the orthodontist adjusts the appliances to move the teeth toward their final destination.
Generally, the orthodontist specifies in a prescription the final tooth arrangement. The prescription is based on the orthodontist's knowledge and experience in selecting the intended final position of each tooth. The orthodontist or an assistant applies the prescription in moving the teeth over a number of office visits.
The process of attaching the braces to teeth is tedious and painful to the patient. Additionally, each visit reduces the “chair-time” available to the orthodontist that could be used for another patient. Hence, the process of treating teeth using braces can be expensive.
New methods, such as those described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,975,893, allow the treatment to be planned in advance and all individual appliances to be fabricated at the outset of treatment. The appliances may thus be provided to the patient as a single package or system. Unlike braces, the patient need not visit the treating professional every time an adjustment in the treatment is made. While the patients will usually want to visit their treating professionals periodically to assure that treatment is going according to the original plan, eliminating the need to visit the treating professional each time an adjustment is to be made allows the treatment to be carried out in many more, but smaller, successive steps while still reducing the time spent by the treating professional with the individual patient. Moreover, the ability to use polymeric shell appliances that are more comfortable, less visible, and removable by the patient, greatly improves patient compliance, comfort, and satisfaction.
In the above system, and in other computer-aided teeth treatment systems as a first step, a digital data set representing an initial tooth arrangement is obtained, referred to hereinafter as the IDDS. The IDDS may be obtained in a variety of ways. For example, the patient's teeth may be scanned or imaged using well known technology, such as X-rays, three-dimensional x-rays, computer-aided tomographic images or data sets, magnetic resonance images, etc. Methods for digitizing such conventional images to produce data sets useful in the present invention are well known and described in the patent and medical literature. Usually, however, the present invention will rely on first obtaining a plaster cast of the patient's teeth by well known techniques, such as those described in Graber, Orthodontics: Principle and Practice, Second Edition, Saunders, Philadelphia, 1969, pp. 401-415. After the tooth casting is obtained, it can be digitally scanned using a conventional laser scanner or other range acquisition system to produce the IDDS. The data set produced by the range acquisition system may, of course, be converted to other formats to be compatible with the software which is used for manipulating images within the data set, as described in more detail below. General techniques for producing plaster casts of teeth and generating digital models using laser scanning techniques are described, for example, in U.S. Pat. No. 5,605,459. After scanning, computer models of teeth on an upper jaw and a lower jaw are generated. However, these models are not aligned relative to each other. Thus, a bite setting operation is manually performed using human operators.
The present invention includes a system, apparatus and computer-implemented method for arranging a computer model of teeth. In one aspect, a method for bite-setting computer models of teeth on a first jaw and a second jaw includes determining an initial position of the first jaw; and determining an optimal bite based on the initial position of the first jaw.
Implementations of the above aspect may include one or more of the following. Determining the initial position can include determining a corresponding tooth on the second jaw for every molar and premolar tooth in the first jaw; determining a transform for the first jaw; and applying the transform to the first jaw. The process can shift the first jaw to be above the second jaw. Determining the transform can minimize a sum of squared distances between corresponding teeth. The process can simulate physical force on the jaws. Gravity force (G force) can be applied to the jaw. The process can apply a repulsion force which occurs between jaws if a collision occurs. The force can be proportional to square of collision. The position of the first jaw can be calculated from a model of solid body motion. The process includes testing position stability when a final position of the first jaw is achieved. The testing operation includes applying force in a side direction to the jaw. A new bite setting position can be generated if the final position is unstable. The process includes determining a plurality of stable bite setting positions and selecting a bite setting position with minimal distance between corresponding teeth.
In another aspect, a method for bite setting dental jaws includes digitally scanning PVS bites, upper arch and lower arch of a patient; displaying the upper arch, lower arch and the PVS bite on a computer screen; and comparing the digital bite against impressions on the PVS bite to determine proper bite-set.
Advantages of the invention include one or more of the following. When digital data relating to teeth on the upper and lower jaws is provided, a bite-aligned computer model can be generated. The models of jaws are visible for alignment purposes as an operator moves them either left or right or tilts them up or down. The system provides an easy way to determine the relative position of the upper jaw to the lower jaw. By providing a visual picture of one jaw relative to another jaw, the system eliminates guesswork as to the bite setting for the models of the teeth on the jaws. The process also provides significant labor saving benefits.
Other advantages include enhanced accuracy. A better bite definition can be ascertained, resulting in better patient treatment. The bite alignment is stable with little distortion. The system also supports a reconstruction of distorted molars. Additionally, a better starting point for final bite creation is achieved.
Referring now to
As set forth in the prior applications, each polymeric shell may be configured so that its tooth-receiving cavity has a geometry corresponding to an intermediate or final tooth arrangement intended for the appliance. The patient's teeth are repositioned from their initial tooth arrangement to a final tooth arrangement by placing a series of incremental position adjustment appliances over the patient's teeth. The adjustment appliances are generated at the beginning of the treatment, and the patient wears each appliance until the pressure of each appliance on the teeth can no longer be felt. At that point, the patient replaces the current adjustment appliance with the next adjustment appliance in the series until no more appliances remain. Conveniently, the appliances are generally not affixed to the teeth and the patient may place and replace the appliances at any time during the procedure. The final appliance or several appliances in the series may have a geometry or geometries selected to overcorrect the tooth arrangement, i.e., have a geometry which would (if fully achieved) move individual teeth beyond the tooth arrangement which has been selected as the “final.” Such over-correction may be desirable in order to offset potential relapse after the repositioning method has been terminated, i.e., to permit movement of individual teeth back toward their pre-corrected positions. Over-correction may also be beneficial to speed the rate of correction, i.e., by having an appliance with a geometry that is positioned beyond a desired intermediate or final position, the individual teeth will be shifted toward the position at a greater rate. In such cases, the use of an appliance can be terminated before the teeth reach the positions defined by the appliance.
The polymeric shell 111 can fit over all teeth present in the upper or lower jaw. Often, only certain one(s) of the teeth will be repositioned while others of the teeth will provide a base or an anchor region for holding the appliance 111 in place as the appliance 111 applies a resilient repositioning force against the tooth or teeth to be repositioned. In complex cases, however, multiple teeth may be repositioned at some point during the treatment. In such cases, the moved teeth can also serve as a base or anchor region for holding the repositioning appliance.
The polymeric appliance 111 of
After segmenting or isolating the components, the teeth are moved based on rules and algorithms programmed into the computer. In this step, each stage of tooth movement is determined by an attraction model between selected points on adjacent teeth. This step is iterated until an acceptable result is achieved (step 204). In one embodiment, the system stops the movement when the relative positions of the teeth satisfy a predetermined target.
In step 206, positions for the upper and lower teeth in a masticatory system of a patient are determined by generating a computer representation of the masticatory system. An occlusion of the upper and lower teeth is computed from the computer representation; and a functional occlusion is computed based on interactions in the computer representation of the masticatory system. The occlusion may be determined by generating a set of ideal models of the teeth. Each ideal model in the set of ideal models is an abstract model of idealized teeth placement, which is customized to the patient's teeth, as discussed below. After applying the ideal model to the computer representation, the position of the teeth can be optimized to fit the ideal model. The ideal model may be specified by one or more arch forms, or may be specified using various features associated with the teeth.
Once the teeth arrangements are determined, a series of appliances that move the teeth in a specified sequence are generated (step 208). For example, the teeth models may be rotated until their roots are in the proper vertical position. Next, the teeth models may be rotated around their vertical axis into the proper orientation. The teeth models are then observed from the side, and translated vertically into their proper vertical position. Finally, the two arches are placed together, and the teeth models moved slightly to ensure that the upper and lower arches properly mesh together. The meshing of the upper and lower arches together can be visualized using a collision detection process to highlight the contacting points of the teeth.
As part of the generation of the initial digital data set representing an initial tooth arrangement of step 202, a bite-setting guide 310 is used to make a bite-setting of upper and lower jaws. As shown in
Referring now to
In another embodiment, the teeth may be aligned automatically. In this embodiment, the models of the jaws are moved so that they are aligned to the features of one or more corresponding teeth. The features may be based on cusps, fossae, ridges, distance-based metrics, or shape-based metrics. Shape-based metrics may be expressed as a function of the patient's arches, among others. For example, cusp features associated with each tooth may be used. Cusps are pointed projections on the chewing surface of a tooth. In a detection stage, a possible cusp is viewed as an “island” on the surface of the tooth, with the candidate cusp at the highest point on the island. “Highest” is measured with respect to the coordinate system of the model, but could just as easily be measured with respect to the local coordinate system of each tooth.
The set of all possible cusps is determined by looking for all local maxima on the tooth model that are within a specified distance of the top of the bounding box of the model. First, the highest point on the model is designated as the first candidate cusp. A plane is passed through this point, perpendicular to the direction along which the height of a point is measured. The plane is then lowered by a small predetermined distance along the Z axis. Next, all vertices connected to the tooth and which are above the plane and on some connected component are associated with the candidate cusp as cusps. This step is also referred to as a flood fill step. From each candidate cusp point, outward flooding is performed, marking each vertex on the model visited in this matter as part of the corresponding candidate cusp. After the flood fill step is complete, every vertex on the model is examined. Any vertex that is above the plane and has not been visited by one of the flood fills is added to the list of candidate cusps. These steps are repeated until the plane has traveled a specified distance. After the detection stage, the cusp detection process may include a rejection stage where local geometries around each of the cusp candidates are analyzed to determine if they possess non-cusp-like features. Cusp candidates that exhibit non-cusp-like features are removed from the list of cusp candidates. Various criteria may be used to identify non-cusp-like features. According to one test, the local curvature of the surface around the cusp candidate is used to determine whether the candidate possesses non-cusp-like features. Alternatively, a measure of smoothness is computed based on the average normal in an area around the candidate cusp. If the average normal deviates from the normal at the cusp by more than a specified amount, the candidate cusp is rejected.
Additionally, a simplified set of movement physics (kinematics) may be applied to the bite-set dental models. The process can perform a simulation using a simplified set of interacting forces on the jaws in relation to one another. The simplified physical simulation allows the system to focus on motions involving much contact between the jaws. The physical simulation allows the system to render realistic physically correct jaw movements when the jaws come into contact with each other. A range of simulated motion may be supplied using a library of motions. One typical motion supplied by the library is a protrusive motion where the lower jaw 100 is moved forward and backward to bring the front teeth on both jaws into contact with each other. Another motion is a lateral motion found in food chewing. The lateral motion involves moving the jaws side to side. Other motions that may be supplied in the library include motions that are “tooth guided” where the path of the lower jaw is guided by the teeth in contact with each other. Next, the process adjusts the final position based on contacts observed during the simulation of motions. The result of the simulation is analyzed, the position of each tooth can be adjusted if contacts associated with that tooth are deemed excessive. Finally, based on the contact data generated, the process determines whether additional motion simulations need to be done. The motion simulation may be rerun until the contacts associated with each tooth are acceptable to the treating orthodontist. The tooth model manipulation process can be done subjectively, i.e., the user may simply reposition teeth in an aesthetically and/or therapeutically desired manner based on observations of the final position or based on the simulation of contacts. Alternatively, rules and algorithms may be used to assist the user in repositioning the teeth based on the contacts.
In one embodiment called Automated Bite Setting Using PVS Bites, PVS bites are digitally scanned using a template to evaluate bite set results. When the technician is ready to set the bite, he or she will bring up all three objects (upper arch, lower arch and the PVS bite) on the screen. As shown in
If the correct occlusion cannot be determined digitally, detailed plasters are poured up and the bite is manually registered. The cases can be checked against photos supplied by the submitting doctor and any adjustments required to the digital bites are then performed.
In another embodiment called Automated Bite Setting with Centric Occlusion, a process implemented in software attempts to find a “best fit” between digital models of the upper and lower arches, much like fitting two plaster models together. This process works well for most cases, with the exception of open bites since a best fit position cannot be ascertained for these cases. As shown in
To find initial position of step 1, the following process is used:
In this model G force is applied to the upper jaw. In case of collision, a repulsion force occurs between jaws. This force is proportional to square of collision. The position of the upper jaw is calculated from equation of solid body motion. When the final position of the upper jaw is achieved, the stability of this position is tested. For this purpose force in side directions is applied to the jaw. If the jaw moves easily then the position is judged to be unstable and a series of bite setting process from one or more new initial positions are initiated. For example, new initial positions are shifted from the original one in Y direction from −8 mm to +7 mm with the step of 3 mm. In this way 7 different bite positions are determined, including the first one. The user is then asked to select an optimal position.
If the software could not find a proper position for the upper jaw, it will show a dialog to let the user select between different iterations. In this dialog, a user can hide the upper jaw and turn on a view showing teeth collisions, to see which position is most proper. When the user selects a position, the upper jaw is set to the selected position and the scene is left open for correction and saving.
The above embodiments take the guesswork out of bite setting and eliminate the need to pour plaster models for bite issues. For example:
Various alternatives, modifications, and equivalents may be used in lieu of the above components. Although the final position of the teeth may be determined using computer-aided techniques, a user may move the teeth into their final positions by independently manipulating one or more teeth while satisfying the constraints of the prescription. Additionally, the techniques described here may be implemented in hardware or software, or a combination of the two. The techniques may be implemented in computer programs executing on programmable computers that each includes a processor, a storage medium readable by the processor (including volatile and nonvolatile memory and/or storage elements), and suitable input and output devices. Program code is applied to data entered using an input device to perform the functions described and to generate output information. The output information is applied to one or more output devices. Each program can be implemented in a high level procedural or object-oriented programming language to operate in conjunction with a computer system. However, the programs can be implemented in assembly or machine language, if desired. In any case, the language may be a compiled or interpreted language. Each such computer program can be stored on a storage medium or device (e.g., CD-ROM, hard disk or magnetic diskette) that is readable by a general or special purpose programmable computer for configuring and operating the computer when the storage medium or device is read by the computer to perform the procedures described. The system also may be implemented as a computer-readable storage medium, configured with a computer program, where the storage medium so configured causes a computer to operate in a specific and predefined manner. Further, while the invention has been shown and described with reference to an embodiment thereof, those skilled in the art will understand that the above and other changes in form and detail may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2467432 | Kesling | Apr 1949 | A |
3660900 | Andrews | May 1972 | A |
3860803 | Levine | Jan 1975 | A |
3916526 | Schudy | Nov 1975 | A |
3950851 | Bergersen | Apr 1976 | A |
4014096 | Dellinger | Mar 1977 | A |
4195046 | Kesling | Mar 1980 | A |
4324546 | Heitlinger et al. | Apr 1982 | A |
4348178 | Kurz | Sep 1982 | A |
4478580 | Barrut | Oct 1984 | A |
4504225 | Yoshii | Mar 1985 | A |
4505673 | Yoshii | Mar 1985 | A |
4575805 | Moermann et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4611288 | Duret et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
4656860 | Orthuber et al. | Apr 1987 | A |
4663720 | Duret et al. | May 1987 | A |
4742464 | Duret et al. | May 1988 | A |
4755139 | Abbatte et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4763791 | Halverson et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4793803 | Martz | Dec 1988 | A |
4798534 | Breads | Jan 1989 | A |
4837732 | Brandestini et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4850864 | Diamond | Jul 1989 | A |
4856991 | Breads et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4936862 | Walker et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4937928 | Van Der Zel | Jul 1990 | A |
4964770 | Steinbichler et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4975052 | Spencer et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
5011405 | Lemchen | Apr 1991 | A |
5017133 | Miura | May 1991 | A |
5027281 | Rekow et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5035613 | Breads et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5055039 | Abbatte et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5059118 | Breads et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5100316 | Wildman | Mar 1992 | A |
5121333 | Riley et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5128870 | Erdman et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5131843 | Hilgers et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5131844 | Marinaccio et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5139419 | Andreiko et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5184306 | Erdman et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5186623 | Breads et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5257203 | Riley et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5273429 | Rekow et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5278756 | Lemchen et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5338198 | Wu et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5340309 | Robertson | Aug 1994 | A |
5342202 | Deshayes | Aug 1994 | A |
5368478 | Andreiko et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5382164 | Stern | Jan 1995 | A |
5395238 | Andreiko et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5431562 | Andreiko et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5440326 | Quinn | Aug 1995 | A |
5440496 | Andersson et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5447432 | Andreiko et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5452219 | Dehoff et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5454717 | Andreiko et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5456600 | Andreiko et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5474448 | Andreiko et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5518397 | Andreiko et al. | May 1996 | A |
5533895 | Andreiko et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5542842 | Andreiko et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5549476 | Stern | Aug 1996 | A |
5587912 | Andersson et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5605459 | Kuroda et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5607305 | Andersson et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5645421 | Slootsky | Jul 1997 | A |
5655653 | Chester | Aug 1997 | A |
5683243 | Andreiko et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5733126 | Andersson et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5740267 | Echerer et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5975893 | Chishti et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6152731 | Jordan et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6726478 | Isiderio et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6979196 | Nikolskiy et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0091876 | Oct 1983 | EP |
0299490 | Jan 1989 | EP |
0376873 | Apr 1990 | EP |
0490848 | Jun 1992 | EP |
0774933 | May 1997 | EP |
0541500 | Jun 1998 | EP |
0731673 | Sep 1998 | EP |
2369828 | Jun 1978 | FR |
2652256 | Mar 1991 | FR |
WO 9008512 | Aug 1990 | WO |
WO 9104713 | Apr 1991 | WO |
WO 9410935 | May 1994 | WO |
WO 9844865 | Oct 1998 | WO |
WO 9858596 | Dec 1998 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040224286 A1 | Nov 2004 | US |