PDF Download - Glidewell Dental Labs

CLINICAL CASE REPORT
Summary
Digital scanning technology used in conjunction with CBCT
scanning can offer a high level of confidence to practitioners
both in terms of implant placement and implant restoration.
This case demonstrated the merged file, “crown down” planning,
virtual implant placement and tooth-supported surgical
guide design that is possible using CAD software. The unique
customization features of 3-D printing technology allowed
for the creation of a tooth-supported surgical guide in a 100
percent digital environment without the use of stone modeling.
The custom provisional restorations demonstrated the
accuracy of the tooth-supported surgical guide because they
were delivered immediately at the time of implant placement
and required no adjustments. Open-source Inclusive Scanning
Abutments used with the NobelReplace implant system
demonstrated that the actual implant position data could
be accurately captured using the chosen intraoral scanning
technology (iTero). The generated STL files could then be directly
sent to the lab for the design and milling of the screwretained
all-zirconia crowns.
As technology races forward, the current challenges of
developing higher levels of accuracy and consistency are
being addressed, providing clinicians with an increased
level of confidence for implant placement and restoration.
This case, but one example of the growing possibilities,
demonstrates just how far we have come! IM
GENERAL REFERENCES
• Abboud M, Orentlicher G. An open system approach for surgical guide production.
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Dec;69(12):e519-24.
• Hu XY, et al. [The reliability and accuracy of the digital models reconstructed by conebeam
computed tomography]. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2011 Oct;20(5):512-6.
• Behneke A, Burwinkel M, Behneke N. Factors influencing transfer accuracy of cone
beam CT-derived template-based implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012
Apr;23(4):416-23. Epub 2011 Oct 24.
• Noh H, et al. Registration accuracy in the integration of laser-scanned dental images
into maxillofacial cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod
Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Oct;140(4):585-91.
• Wouters V, Mollemans W, Schutyser F. Calibrated segmentation of CBCT and CT
images for digitization of dental prostheses. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2011
Sep;6(5):609-16. Epub 2011 May 3.
• Farman AG, Feuerstein P, Levato CM. Using CBCT in the general practice. Compend
Contin Educ Dent. 2011 Mar;32(2):14-6.
• Tarazona B, et al. A comparison between dental measurements taken from CBCT
models and those taken from a digital method. Eur J Orthod. 2013 Feb;35(1). Epub
2011 Mar 22.
• Farman AG. More about CBCT. J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Mar;142(3):246, 249; author
reply 249-50.
• Schwartz AI. Improving precision with CBCT imaging. Dent Today. 2011 Jan;30(1):
168-71.
• Al-Ekrish AA, Ekram M. A comparative study of the accuracy and reliability of
multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography in
the assessment of dental implant site dimensions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011
Feb;40(2):67-75.
• Worthington P, Rubenstein J, Hatcher DC. The role of cone-beam computed tomography
in the planning and placement of implants. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010
Oct;141 Suppl 3:19S-24S.
• Maret D, et al. Accuracy of 3D reconstructions based on cone beam computed
tomography. J Dent Res. 2010 Dec;89(12):1465-9. Epub 2010 Oct 7.
• Chan HL, Misch K, Wang HL. Dental imaging in implant treatment planning.
Implant Dent. 2010 Aug;19(4):288-98.
• Hassan B, et al. Influence of scanning and reconstruction parameters on quality of
three-dimensional surface models of the dental arches from cone beam computed
tomography. Clin Oral Investig. 2010 Jun;14(3):303-10. Epub 2009 Jun 9.
• Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin
North Am. 2008 Oct;52(4):707-30, v.
• D’Souza KM, Aras MA. Types of implant surgical guides in dentistry: a review.
J Oral Implantol. 2012 Oct;38(5):643-52. Epub 2011 Sep 9.
• Cassetta M, et al. Accuracy of two stereolithographic surgical templates: a retrospective
study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011 Jul 11. Epub ahead of print.
• Nokar S, et al. Accuracy of implant placement using a CAD/CAM surgical guide: an
in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 May-Jun;26(3):520-6.
• Frisardi G, et al. Integration of 3D anatomical data obtained by CT imaging and
3D optical scanning for computer aided implant surgery. BMC Med Imaging. 2011
Feb 21;11:5.
• Al-Harbi SA, Sun AY. Implant placement accuracy when using stereolithographic
template as a surgical guide: preliminary results. Implant Dent. 2009 Feb;18(1):46-56.
• van der Zel JM. Implant planning and placement using optical scanning and cone
beam CT technology. J Prosthodont. 2008 Aug;17(6):476-81. Epub 2008 May 9.
• Jones PE. Cadent iTero digital impression case study: full-arch fixed provisional
bridge. DC Dentalcompare. 2009 Jul 8 [cited 2011 Jul 28]. Available from:
http://www.dentalcompare.com/Featured-Articles/2082-Cadent-iTero-Digital-Impression-Case-Study-Full-Arch-Fixed-Provisional-Bridge/.
• Jones PE. From intraoral scan to final custom implant restoration. Inclusive. Fall
2011;2(4):6-13.
• Jones PE. Implant Q&A: an interview with Dr. Perry Jones. Inclusive. Summer 2012;
3(2):42-46.
• Jones PE. Milled modeless crowns. Dental Product Shopper. August 2012;
6(8):76A-79A.
• Jones PE. Creating surgical guides using CBCT and intraoral scanning. Inclusive.
Fall 2012;3(3):83-90.
64
– www.inclusivemagazine.com –