References

Rebmann Research. Atlas Dental Study 2018. European markets: structures, challenges and scenarios. http://www.gfdi.de/ids-2019/Atlas_Dentalstudie_2018_EN.pdf (accessed July 2021)
Scherer MD. The invention of 3D printing and its impact on dentistry: an interview with Check Hull. Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry. 2020; 41:504-507
Mörmann WH. The origin of the Cerec method: a personal review of the first 5 years. Int J Comput Dent. 2004; 7:11-24
Mörmann WH. The evolution of the CEREC system. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006; 7S-13S https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0398
Skramstad MJ. A new milling unit for an efficient workflow. Int J Comput Dent. 2020; 23:83-91
Diker B, Tak Ö. Comparing the accuracy of six intraoral scanners on prepared teeth and effect of scanning sequence. J Adv Prosthodont. 2020; 12:299-306 https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.5.299
Tchorz JP, Wrbas KT, Hellwig E. Guided endodontic access of a calcified mandibular central incisor using a software-based three-dimensional treatment plan. Int J Comput Dent. 2019; 22:273-281
Schubert O, Schweiger J, Stimmelmayr M Digital implant planning and guided implant surgery – workflow and reliability. Br Dent J. 2019; 226:101-108 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2019.44
Mukai S, Mukai E, Santos-Junior JA Assessment of the reproducibility and precision of milling and 3D printing surgical guides. BMC Oral Health. 2021; 21 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-01362-6
Ender A, Zimmermann M, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro. Int J Comput Dent. 2019; 22:11-19
Nedelcu R, Olsson P, Nyström I Accuracy and precision of three intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: a novel in vivo analysis method. J Dent. 2018; 69:110-118 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.12.006
Sfondrini MF, Gandini P, Malfatto M Computerized casts for orthodontic purpose using powder-free intraoral scanners: accuracy, execution time, and patient feedback. Biomed Res Int. 2018; 2018 https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4103232
Khorsandi D, Fahimipour A, Abasian P 3D and 4D printing in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery: printing techniques, materials, and applications. Acta Biomater. 2021; 122:26-49 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2020.12.044
Koutsoukis T, Zinelis S, Eliades G Selective laser melting technique of Co-Cr dental alloys: a review of structure and properties and comparative analysis with other available techniques. J Prosthodont. 2015; 24:303-312 https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12268
Xin X. Z, Xiang N, Chen J In-vitro biocompatibility of Co-Cr alloy fabricated by selective laser melting or traditional casting techniques. Mater Lett. 2012; 88:101-103
Salah M, Tayebi L, Moharamzadeh K, Naini FB. Three-dimensional bio-printing and bone tissue engineering: technical innovations and potential applications in maxillofacial reconstructive surgery. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020; 42 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-020-00263-6
Nesic D, Schaefer BM, Sun Y 3D printing approach in dentistry: the future for personalized oral soft tissue regeneration. J Clin Med. 2020; 9 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9072238
Nesic D, Dural S, Marger L Could 3D printing be the future for oral soft tissue regeneration?. Bioprinting. 2020; 20
Bell CK, Sahl EF, Kim YJ, Rice DD. Accuracy of implants placed with surgical guides: thermoplastic versus 3D printed. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2018; 38:113-119 https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.3254
Della Bona A, Cantelli V, Britto VT 3D printing restorative materials using a stereolithographic technique: a systematic review. Dent Mater. 2021; 37:336-350 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2020.11.030
Jahangiri L, Akiva G, Lakhia S, Turkyilmaz I. Understanding the complexities of digital dentistry integration in high-volume dental institutions. Br Dent J. 2020; 229:166-168 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-020-1928-5
Zimmermann M, Mörmann W, Mehl A, Hickel R. Teaching dental undergraduate students restorative CAD/CAM technology: evaluation of a new concept. Int J Comput Dent. 2019; 22:263-271
Bilir H, Ayguzen C. Comparison of digital and conventional impression methods by preclinical students: efficiency and future expectations. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2020; 10:402-409 https://doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_330_18

CADCAM in dentistry. Materials and methods: an overview for the dental team

From Volume 48, Issue 8, September 2021 | Pages 671-678

Authors

Simon Fieldhouse

BSc (Hons), BDS, FDSRCS (England)

Specialist in Oral Surgery, Practice Principal, The Dutch Barton, Bradford on Avon, UK

Articles by Simon Fieldhouse

Email Simon Fieldhouse

Abstract

CADCAM is still a relatively underused genre in UK dentistry. This article examines, in broad context, the range of technology and materials available in the UK. The nature of a digital workflow is outlined, with examples therein. Subtractive and additive manufacturing is discussed, along with manufacturing methods and materials. The perceived barriers to incorporating CADCAM, the actual benefits of digital dentistry to the dental team, and our patients, along with comments as to the future of digital dentistry in the UK are also discussed.

CPD/Clinical Relevance: With the increasing interest in CADCAM in UK dentistry, an overview of emerging technology and materials is essential information for clinicians.

Article

Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CADCAM) has been commonplace in dentistry for a number of years. CADCAM is the use of software to design and control the production of ‘things’, such as prototypes and finished products. In the case of dentistry, we can literally produce anything from models to crowns, bridges, stents, orthotics, abutments, aligners, dentures, and bone grafts; in fact, almost anything we can think of.

We talk about digital dentistry, but what is it? Some would say it is the use of dental technology or devices, incorporating computer-controlled modalities to carry out dental procedures. This could be in the production of a prosthesis, or as an adjunct to guided surgery.

When looking at the introduction of digital technology within our profession, the UK compares favourably with the rest of Europe, when looking at digital per se (patient management systems, clinical records, etc). However, when considering dental CADCAM, we continue to be in a relative backwater when compared with many countries. Current industry information shows that, in the UK, 8–12% of practitioners use some form of CADCAM in their clinical workflows.1 While looking at the range of digital workflows and associated materials available, this article explores the business benefits and asks why digital dentistry has taken so long to gain a foothold in the UK.

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Up to 2 free articles per month
  • New content available