From 3D Printing Industry:
Material jetting specialist XJet has announced a global partnership with dentistry leader Straumann to advance the capabilities of its AM technology for dentistry applications. The duo intends to develop the XJet Carmel 1400 system currently used at the Straumann headquarters in Basel, Switzerland to begin producing end-use ceramic parts.
A step toward 3D printed ceramic restorations.
A study looking into the accuracy of digital scanning devices. Primescan and CS3700 were the most accurate.
A careful statistical analysis was performed. Results. PRIMESCAN® showed the highest congruence between SB MEs and LF, with the lowest mean absolute deviation (25.5 ± 5.0 μm), immediately followed by CS 3700® (27.0 ± 4.3 μm); the difference between them was not significant (p = 0.1235).
Imagine a world in which—if you owned a Volkswagen—you could only fill up at a Volkswagen gas station using Volkswagen gas. Ford gas won’t work. You can only drive in the Volkswagen lane and take the Volkswagen off ramp. If the Volkswagen off ramp is closed for repairs, you can’t take the Ford or Toyota off ramp. That whole scenario is ridiculous but it is basically what happens when we use closed proprietary dental systems.
Interoperability is the ability of different systems from different vendors to work together. The opposite is proprietary, where users are restricted to one vendor’s products.
Dental management systems with electronic records, digital radiographs and digital impression systems are all highly proprietary. That is the user can not transfer a patient record from one office another electronically. Radiographic sensors are limited to specific software and some vendors even restrict which transfer system a user can use to send and impression over the Internet.
When shopping for a digital product, tell the vendors that an open system is an important buying factor. Ask the sales person if you can transfer the digital impression to any lab of your choice or if you can load the impression into design software of your choice. In most cases, the answer will be no. Let the sales person—or, better yet, the sales managers and product managers—know that you won’t buy a closed system.
Vendors love closed systems that keep dentists captive. They will not change until the dentists buying the systems demand a change.
Download free educational materials, infographics and more to share the Digital Dentistry Difference story, and see the difference it makes for your patients and your business.
Source: Home – Carestream Dental
From ADA News:
Dentists can experience firsthand how to integrate digital technology into their practices as part of the Digital Workflow Experience at the ADA FDI World Dental Congress this September in San Francisco.
Source: Digital Workflow Experience takes dentists through ‘office of now’
I was intrigued by the title “Digital Workflow Experience” as that has become a major interest of mine. However the FDI exhibit is focused on clinical procedures such as digital impressions. That is fine however I see digital workflow as more a function of the business side of the office.
Nevertheless if you are going to FDI in September check it out.
From New Dentist Blog:
These three questions. Does it improve the ease of care? Does it make the patient more comfortable? And does it improve quality? Are all essential when evaluating new technologies?
Source: Technology and You – New Dentist Blog
The linked article by Dr. William van Dyk is mostly concerned with clinical technology, CAD CAM, implants and digital radiography. He points out that early CAD CAM restorations were compromised. Dentists should begin their evaluation of new technology by examining how it ultimately effects the patient.
There is no question that this is important. It is totally inappropriate for dentists to be “experimenting” with new devices on patients. Or to compromise quality in order to use an exciting techno gizmo. On the other hand you always and forever do not know what you do not know.
It is all too easy to fall into the “That’s the way we have always done it” mentality.
RESULTS The RMS value (152±52 µm) of the model manufactured by the milling method was significantly higher than the RMS value (52±9 µm) of the model produced by the 3D printing method.
CONCLUSION The accuracy of the 3D printing method is superior to that of the milling method, but at present, both methods are limited in their application as a work model for prosthesis manufacture.
Source: Accuracy evaluation of dental models manufactured by CAD/CAM milling method and 3D printing method
Interesting.
From Wikipedia:
STL (an abbreviation of “stereolithography”) is a file format native to the stereolithography CAD software created by 3D Systems.[1][2][3] STL has several after-the-fact backronyms such as “Standard Triangle Language” and “Standard Tessellation Language”.[4] This file format is supported by many other software packages; it is widely used for rapid prototyping, 3D printing and computer-aided manufacturing.[5] STL files describe only the surface geometry of a three-dimensional object without any representatio
Source: STL (file format) – Wikipedia
STL is the standard file format used for 3D objects. In dentistry this applies to digital impressions. CAD CAM mills, restorative software, 3D printers and more.
Do NOT purchase any 3D system, including CAD-CAM unless it is STL compliant and allows you, the user, to export data to outside systems. In other words is the system interoperable?
The opposite of interoperable is proprietary. Many (maybe most) dental vendors try to sell us proprietary systems which keep us captive,then have the audacity to tell us being their prisoner is in our best interests. Don’t let them do that to you.
Good news, if you have or are considering purchasing equipment this year! Section 179 allows you to deduct up to $500,000 of the purchase price. Important, this is only for items purchased and installed in the 2017 Calendar Year. In other words before December 31, 2017. Go to www.section179.org to find out more information.
I suggest you consider year end technology investments in this order:
PS: You would be a fool to take this as tax advise, blah blah blah consult your tax adviser to determine your personal situation. 🙂
EvoDent was one of the more impressive 3D printers I saw at GNYDM. It has wide distribution in Asia but is new to the US. The primary use of 3D printers in dentistry remains with dental labs, However there are many uses for it in a dental office, including temps and splints or any device that can be printed in less than an hour in order to provide same day service.
Source: Solutions
Nexa3D, the maker of ultra-fast Stereolithography professional-grade 3D printers, BEGO, the leading provider of digital and traditional dental materials, 3D printers and services together with XYZprinting, the world’s leading desktop 3D printer brand, today announced the groundbreaking three-way partnership designed to transform digital dentistry…
…”This comprehensive three-way strategic alliance is designed to accelerate dental market access to affordable industrial grade 3D printing solutions globally,” said XYZprinting CEO, Simon Shen.
Source: Nexa3D, BEGO and XYZprinting Form Strategic Partnership to Accelerate the Transformation of Digital
Before long every dental office will have a 3D printer as a basic piece of equipment just as we now have an x-ray device. I saw four different dental 3D printers at the GNYDM. Just a few years ago there were none.
The future is coming…
Remember Typewriters? Remember film cameras?
Soon we will be saying remember alginate and PVS?
Digital impressions are to traditional impressions as typing is to word processing. I am using a Trios exclusively for impressions including full mouth impressions and bites for sleep apnea devices and it is marvelous.
One of the best features is that I can easily go back over an area and fix any discrepancies in the digital impression. Try that with alginate or PVS.
Intelligent scanning features, such as real-time feedback, are just a few of the updates to the CS 3600’s acquisition software algorithms. Rather than attempting multiple rescans or rendering an image only to find holes in the dataset, useful guides and feedback increase efficiency and enhance scan quality. If a scan lacks detail and requires additional scanning, green guide arrows indicate the ideal direction to rescan the missing information. Yellow highlights alert the user of gaps in the scan, while green highlights indicate holes in the data set.
The next step in digital technology. The system guides you with prompts in order to get a complete digital impression. Follow the link for the whole press release from Carestream.
The global 3D dental scanners market to grow at a CAGR of 10.24% during the period 2017-2021…
According to the report, one of the major drivers for this market is Increasing affordability among people. The rapidly dropping prices of dental scanners as well as increasing availability of low-cost quality dental scanners is enabling dentists to adopt these products at a faster rate. Also, the added benefit of decreasing time consumption for one patient’s diagnosis and treatment, broadens their spectrum of reach to more patients, thus increasing their profit.
Source: Global 3D Dental Scanners Market 2017-2021 – Market to Grow at a CAGR of 10.24%
Lower prices will be good. Even better will be interoperable systems so that a dentist can buy a device and use it with any lab or mill.
I spent the morning training on the Trios intra-oral scanner from 3 Shape. it was very easy to use, comparable to the Carestream CS 3500. Both the software and the ease of capture was simple, much better than some older models and no powder. So far I have just been trained but will start using it in the office and see how it works in actual daily use.
From Voxel Dental Solutions:
JUELL 3D Flash OC allows you to produce models for orthodontic aligners, guides and castable parts for a fraction of what it would cost to outsource.
Source: Juell™ 3D-2 Printer – Voxel Dental Solutions
A 3D printer for dental applications for about $15,000
Oral health professionals of all specialties are invited to take their practice to the next level at the 2017 Global Oral Health Summit. This is a two-day immersive learning experience designed for professionals looking to enhance their workflow by either learning more about the software and equipment they already have or by introducing new technology to their practice.
From Longitudes:
…additive manufacturing could bend the cost curve in a number of industries, especially healthcare.
Source: How 3D Printing Could Bend the Cost Curve in Healthcare | Longitudes
The primary issue in all healthcare including dentistry is cost. Insurance would not be an issue if people felt they could pay for quality care at a reasonable price.
Technology, such as 3D printing and smartphone based apps have the potential to bring the cost of healthcare waaaay down. In the past every medical dental device was purpose built to do one rather specific thing. Development and manufacturing costs were high and the number of potential customers (buyers) was low. However if a dentist can use his/her smartphone and simply down load an app or send a file to an off the shelf 3D printer the cost of future tech will be much lower than in the past.
When shopping for a digital product let vendors know that open non-proprietary systems are an important buying factor. Ask the sales person if you can transfer the digital impression to any lab of your choice or if you can load the impression into design software of your choice. In many cases the answer will be no. Let the sales person or better yet the sales managers and product managers know that you won’t buy a closed system.
I promise you that when you do this the salesperson will be prepared with a very plausible sounding reason that their closed system is better and it is in your best interests to play in their private sandbox.
The fact is that closed proprietary systems benefit the manufacturers and vendors they do not benefit the profession and our patients.
Is it possible in practice to digitize plaster models using DVT instead of 3D scanners? What are the differences between the images produced by various 3D scanners and DVTs? Are 3D scanners more accurate than DVT devices?
The linked report indicates alternative methods to digitize a dental model. Interesting but in my opinion it misses the point. Why have a plaster model at all when you can bypass the old gag me, run to the lab and introduce bubbles and error method when dentist can simply take a direct digital model?
