Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2015-03-06, 14:42:46 | version 1.33.01
I 21 CE article _ biomechanical principles I CAD/CAM 1_2015 after final curing so proper tissue management could be maintained until curing was completed. Occlusion was checked with the patient chair at a 45-degree angle. Bausch articulating paper, horseshoe shape, 200 microns thick, was used first, andthepatientwasinstructedtochewonthepaper as if chewing gum. Next, the patient was instructed to tap straight up and down on red Troll Foil artic- ulating foil. Any marks from the chewing strokes thatweren’tcoveredbytheredpaperwereremoved to eliminate interferences and reduce the risk of material fracture (Figs. 33a–c). The restorations were then polished (Fig. 34). For #3 e.max restoration, the burs were NTI Cera Glaze — green, blue and yellow, in order. The green prepolisher was not used on the Empress restora- tion for #4. The final result was minimally invasive restora- tions that appear and function naturally, while decreasing risk of tooth fracture, and minimize further risk to the teeth. (Figs. 35a–36b)._ Editorial note: This article was published in CAD/CAM C.E.MagazineNo.01/2014. _References 1. Gonzalez-LopezS,DeHaro-GasquetF,Vilchez-DiazMA, Ceballos L, Bravo M. Oper Dent. 2006; 31(1):33–38. 2. Fennis WM, Kuijs RH, Kreulen CM, Roeters FJ, Creugers NH, Burgersdijk RC. Int J Prosthodont. 2002; 15(6):559–563. 3. St-GeorgesAJ,SturdevantJR,SwiftEJJr,ThompsonJY. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89:551–557. 4. Magne P, Belser UC. Porcelain Versus Composite Inlays/Onlays; Effects of Mechanical Loads on Stress Distribution,Adhesion,andCrownFlexure.IntJPerio- dontics Restorative Dent. 2003; 23:543–555. 5. Bakeman E, Kois J, Posterior, All-Porcelain, Adhesively Retained Restorations. Inside Dentistry. 2009: 20–33. 6. Dumfahrt H, Schaffer H. Porcelain Laminate Veneers. A Retrospective Evaluation After 1 to 10 Years of Service: Part II—Clinical Results. Int J Prosthodont. 2000; 13(1):9–18. 7. Kois DE, Chaiyabutr Y, Kois JC. Comparison of Load- Fatigue Performance of Posterior Ceramic Onlay Restorations Under Different Preparation Designs. Compendium Contin Educ Dent. 2012; 33(3):2 –9. 8. TjanAH,DunnJR,SandersonIR.MicroleakagePatterns of Porcelain and Castable Ceramic Laminate Veneers. J Prosthet Dent. 1989;61(3):276–282. 9. Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H. Comparison of Digital and Conventional Impression Techniques: Evaluation of Patient’s Perception, Treatment Com- fort, Effectiveness and Clinical Outcomes. BMC Oral Health. 2014. 30;14:10. 10. Patzelt SB, Lamprinos C, Stampf S, Att W. The Time Ef- ficiencyofIntraoralScanners:AnInVitroComparative Study. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014; 145(6):542–551. 11. Geurtsen W, Schwarze T, Gunay H. Diagnosis, Therapy, and Prevention of the Cracked Tooth Syndrome. Quintessence Int. 2003;34(6):409–417. 12. Aminian A, Brunton PA. A Comparison of the Depths Produced Using Three Different Tooth Preparation Techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;89(1):19–22. 13. Larson TD, Douglas WH, Geistfeld RE. Effect of Prepared Cavities on the Strength of Teeth. Oper Dent. 1981;6(1):2–5. Figs. 36a & b_Final restorations, lateral view. Dr.Michael L.Young graduated from the University of Michigan School of Dentistry in 1994.He has a private general dentistry practice in Sterling Heights, Mich.He has been practicing chairside CAD/CAM dentistry since 2004.Young is a mentor for the Kois Center forAdvanced Dental Learning.He is a member of theAmerican DentalAssociation,Michigan Dental Association and the Detroit District Dental Society. CAD/CAM_about the author Fig. 36bFig. 36a CAD0115_12-21_Young 02.03.15 12:39 Seite 10 CAD0115_12-21_Young 02.03.1512:39 Seite 10