OBJECTIVE: We propose a method utilizing mixed reality (MR) goggles (HoloLens 2, Microsoft) to facilitate impacted canine alignment, as planning the traction direction and force delivery could benefit from 3D data visualization using mixed reality (MR). METHODS: Cone-beam CT scans featuring isometric resolution and low noise-to-signal ratio were semi-automatically segmented in Inobitec software. The exported 3D mesh (OBJ file) was then optimized for the HoloLens 2. Using the Unreal Engine environment, we developed an application for the HoloLens 2, implementing HoloLens SDK and UX Tools. Adjustable pointers were added for planning attachment placement, traction direction, and point of force application. The visualization was presented to participants of a course on impacted teeth treatment, followed by a 10-question survey addressing potential advantages (5-point scale: 1 = totally agree, 5 = totally disagree). RESULTS: Out of 38 respondents, 44.7% were orthodontists, 34.2% dentists, 15.8% dental students, and 5.3% dental technicians. Most respondents (44.7%) were between 35 and 44 years old, and only 1 (2.6%) respondent was 55-64 years old. Median answers for six questions were 'totally agree' (25th percentile 1, 75th percentile 2) and for four questions 'agree' (25th percentile 1, 75th percentile 2). No correlation was found between age, profession, and responses. CONCLUSION: Our method generated substantial interest among clinicians. The initial responses affirm the potential benefits, supporting the continued exploration of MR-based techniques for the treatment of impacted teeth. However, the recommendation for widespread use awaits validation through clinical trials.

Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Medical Faculty School of Dental Medicine University of Bern Bern Switzerland

Department of Orthodontics Jagiellonian University Medical College Jagiellonian University in Cracow Krakow Poland

Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry Institute of Dentistry and Oral Sciences Palacký University Olomouc Olomouc Czech Republic

Jagiellonian University Medical College Jagiellonian University in Cracow Krakow Poland

See more in PubMed

Bazargani F, Magnuson A, Dolati A, Lennartsson B. Palatally displaced maxillary canines: factors influencing duration and cost of treatment. Eur J Orthod. 2013;35(3):310‐316. PubMed

Laganà G, Venza N, Borzabadi‐Farahani A, Fabi F, Danesi C, Cozza P. Dental anomalies: prevalence and associations between them in a large sample of non‐orthodontic subjects, a cross‐sectional study. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17(1):62. PubMed PMC

Tetay‐Salgado S, Arriola‐Guillén LE, Ruíz‐Mora GA, Aliaga‐Del Castillo A, Rodríguez‐Cárdenas YA. Prevalence of impacted teeth and supernumerary teeth by radiographic evaluation in three Latin American countries: a cross‐sectional study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2021;13(4):e363‐e368. PubMed PMC

Chaushu S, Kaczor‐Urbanowicz K, Zadurska M, Becker A. Predisposing factors for severe incisor root resorption associated with impacted maxillary canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(1):52‐60. PubMed

Walker L, Enciso R, Mah J. Three‐dimensional localization of maxillary canines with cone‐beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005;128(4):418‐423. PubMed

Alqerban A, Jacobs R, Fieuws S, Willems G. Comparison of two cone beam computed tomographic systems versus panoramic imaging for localization of impacted maxillary canines and detection of root resorption. Eur J Orthod. 2011;33(1):93‐102. PubMed

Chaushu S, Vryonidou M, Becker A, et al. The labiopalatal impacted canine: accurate diagnosis based on the position and size of adjacent teeth: a cone‐beam computed tomography study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2023;163(5):690‐699. PubMed

Becker A, Chaushu G, Chaushu S. Analysis of failure in the treatment of impacted maxillary canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;137(6):743‐754. PubMed

Nasseh I, Al‐Rawi W. Cone beam computed tomography. Dent Clin N Am. 2018;62(3):361‐391. PubMed

Steffen T, Winklhofer S, Starz F, Wiedemeier D, Ahmadli U, Stadlinger B. Three‐dimensional perception of cinematic rendering versus conventional volume rendering using CT and CBCT data of the facial skeleton. Ann Anat. 2022;241:151905. PubMed

Thurzo A, Kočiš F, Novák B, Czako L, Varga I. Three‐dimensional modeling and 3D printing of biocompatible orthodontic power‐arm design with clinical application. Appl Sci. 2021;11(20):9693.

Thurzo A, Urbanová W, Novák B, et al. Where is the artificial intelligence applied in dentistry? Systematic review and literature analysis. Healthcare. 2022;10(7):1269. PubMed PMC

Thurzo A, Stanko P, Urbanova W, et al. The WEB 2.0 induced paradigm shift in the e‐learning and the role of crowdsourcing in dental education. Bratisl Lek Listy. 2010;111(3):168‐175. PubMed

Joda T, Gallucci G, Wismeijer D, Zitzmann N. Augmented and virtual reality in dental medicine: a systematic review. Comput Biol Med. 2019;108:93‐100. PubMed

Moussa R, Alghazaly A, Althagafi N, Eshky R, Borzangy S. Effectiveness of virtual reality and interactive simulators on dental education outcomes: systematic review. Eur J Dent. 2022;16(01):14‐31. PubMed PMC

Mai HN, Dam VV, Lee DH. Accuracy of augmented reality‐assisted navigation in dental implant surgery: systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25(1):e42040. PubMed PMC

Yan X, Yan Y, Cao M, et al. Effectiveness of virtual reality distraction interventions to reduce dental anxiety in pediatric patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Dent. 2023;132:104455. PubMed

Bernauer SA, Zitzmann NU, Joda T. The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics updated: a systematic review. Healthcare. 2023;11(5):679. PubMed PMC