Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2014 Dec 27;7(1):20-4.
eCollection 2014 Jan-Mar.

Digital work-flow

V Marsango  1 , R Bollero  1 , N D'Ovidio  1 , M Miranda  1 , P Bollero  2 , A Barlattani Jr  1
Affiliations
Case Reports

Digital work-flow

V Marsango et al. Oral Implantol (Rome). .

Abstract

Objective: The project presents a clinical case in which the digital work-flow procedure was applied for a prosthetic rehabilitation in natural teeth and implants.

Materials: Digital work-flow uses patient's photo for the aesthetic's planning, digital smile technology for the simulation of the final restoration and real time scanning to register the two arches. Than the scanning are sent to the laboratory that proceed with CAD-CAM production.

Results: Digital work-flow offers the opportunities to easily speak with laboratory and patients, gives better clinical results and demonstrated to be a less invasiveness method for the patient.

Conclusion: Intra-oral scanner, digital smile design, preview using digital wax-up, CAD-CAM production, are new predictable opportunities for prosthetic team. This work-flow, compared with traditional methods, is faster, more precise and predictable.

Keywords: CAD-CAM; digital scanner; digital smile; digital wax-up; digital work-flow.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Intraoral patient’s photo.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Virtual diagnostic wax-up.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Digital impression using intraoral implant scan bodies.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Digital model.
Figure 5
Figure 5
CAD model.
Figure 6 a, b
Figure 6 a, b
CAM prosthesis.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Definitive rehabilitation: the abutments.
Figure 8 a, b
Figure 8 a, b
Front and lateral view of the final aesthetic.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Güth JF, Keul C, Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D. Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clin Oral Investig. 2013 May;17(4):1201–8. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0795-0. Epub 2012 Jul 31. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rubel BS. Impression materials: a comparative review of impression materials most commonly used in restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am. 2007 Jul;51(3):629–42. vi. Review. - PubMed
    1. Johnson GH, Craig RG. Accuracy of four types of rubber impression materials compared with time of pour and a repeat pour of models. J Prosthet Dent. 1985 Apr;53(4):484–90. - PubMed
    1. Millstein PL. Determining the accuracy of gypsum casts made from type IV dental stone. Source J Oral Rehabil. 1992 May;19(3):239–43. Department of Biomaterials, Boston University, Goldman School of Graduate Dentistry, Massachusetts 02118. - PubMed
    1. Christensen GJ. The challenge to conventional impressions. J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Mar;139(3):347–9. No abstract available. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources