Everyone raises issue that not being ceramic as advertised, it doesn't have its solidity. But actually my concern is more about porosity and color change when exposed to dyes in food
I hear your aesthetic concerns however what I find deeply disturbing about this presentation is ZERO conversation about patient sensitivity and ZERO effort to define the word Ceramic which IMHO is inaccurately used as this material in the end is resin based. Making use of the word ceramic appears to be an attempt to neutralize any attempt to question the binding chemicals involved while potentially giving an unknowing patient the assumption that this is somehow equivalent to Zirconia. Many 3D printing systems use at their heart soy based materials to which a good number of patients are sensitive. So as a patient, I want to know what testing was done to gain approval and exactly how valid it was.
This is misleading, this is not a ceramic crown at all, this is a composite crown. Composites are literally ceramic particles in a resin which this is. Very different from e. Max, zirconia, or PFM. It's essentially putting in a printed composite restoration. Very cool for composite veneers etc but nowhere near the strength and longevity of the above mentioned. Thanks for sharing though!
It is majority ceramic. Definitely doesn't have the strength like a true ceramic crown. I find it is useful when using it for a long term temporary or anterior veneers where there is very little load. It technically has less strength the feldspathic porcelain. I also like using it in pre-orthodontic bonding when a tooth has to be moved. It has its uses.
Couldn’t agree more. It’s a highly filled resin. Our direct composites have ceramic particles too. Having been digital for almost 20 years and printing for almost 5, and using 3D software since the mid 90’s, I’m not sure why everyone thinks this is revolutionary. Anyone remember Artglass and it’s claim to fame? Bottom line, your overhead to make a resin crown is as expensive as a lab one (once you factor all the costs). I did tons of belleglass, concept, and targis vectris in the day. It can last but it is more occlusion-dependent than anything else. Problem is people call these “ceramic” and they are not. Beware of submitting to insurance as a ceramic material, because a true ceramic material has no resin in it. For temps, even for big cases, it is not cost effective. Also, ZBrush is overkill. I used it many years ago and there are better (non dental) alternatives. 3D printing is great, no doubt, and I love it, but until we can print a true ceramic material, this is just an indirect resin material.
Longevity? Not sure yet, it's too new. Strength? Not even close to zirconia. But as we know, strength isn't everything in dentistry, sometimes we need some flexibility and give.
3D is a great product for temps while waiting for implants to heal. IMHO material science and printing technology has a long way to go before it can be called a final crown
Not at all. In fact it gives you more work and changes your workplace from a standalone lab to working in the multi-dentist office I have watched several multi-dentist practices at work using this system in the 3on6 approach to full arch replacement. in those offices techs are relied on heavily to both do scanning, approve models before the patient leaves their records day, and work with the dentist on surgery day to make temps and then again in three months to make "final temps" and a week later to make Finals in Zirconia. Because of in practice demands on the Dentist, the tech becomes important in checking the STL file for printing suitability, calibrating the machines, operating them, cleaning them, maintaining them, and in adding final touches to the finished print bring more people into dentists offices by before it goes chairside. The introduction of 3D scanning and printing will increase the flow of patients into dentists offices by reducing the cost of work, and decreasing the Dentist's time way from the chair when aided by a competent tech. 3D printing plus an in office tech extends the Dentist's capacity to see more patients and to get them what they need more quickly with potentially fewer visits
As a lab tech myself, I agree with the sentiment, but I disagree that it's the end. These cheap and fast restorations will fail with time. But the gold, pfm, and full ceramic crowns we've put in thousands of mouths, those will be around forever and have better margins.
Shameful descriptives.. not ceramic at all.. “ they” never go anywhere near this “ temp” crown at all.. design and print is done by low cost underlining workers.. lets be honest what’s going on here!!!
