You are currently viewing Fluxo digital em reabilitação estética por meio de laminados cerâmicos

Fluxo digital em reabilitação estética por meio de laminados cerâmicos

Referências

  1. van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 2012;28(1):3-12.
  2. Papi P, Di Murro B, Penna D, Pompa G. Digital prosthetic workflow during COVID-19 pandemic to limit infection risk in dental practice. Oral Dis 2021;27(suppl.3):723-6.
  3. Stanley M, Paz AG, Miguel I, Coachman C. Fully digital workflow, integrating dental scan, smile design and CAD-CAM: case report. BMC Oral Health 2018;18(1):134.
  4. Coachman C, Van Dooren E, Gürel G, Landsberg CJ, Calamita MA, Bichacho N. Smile design: from digital treatment planning to clinical reality. In: Cohen M, editor. Interdisciplinary treatment planning. Vol 2: comprehensive case studies. Chicago: Quintessence, 2012. p.119-74.
  5. Lee JH, Son K, Lee KB. Marginal and internal fit of ceramic restorations fabricated using digital scanning and conventional impressions: a clinical study. J Clin Med 2020;14;9(12):4035.
  6. Chiu A, Chen YW, Hayashi J, Sadr A. Accuracy of CAD/CAM digital impressions with different intraoral scanner parameters. Sensors (Basel) 2020;20(4):1157.
  7. Schweiger J, Güth J-F, Edelhoff D, Seidel K, Graf T. Application of 3D-printed colored 3D-models for the fabrication of full ceramic restorations: a technical report. J Esthet Restor Dent 2022;34(1):235-43.
  8. Poggio CE, Bonfiglioli R, Dosoli R. A patient presentation: planning and executing a difficult case in a full digital workflow. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021;33(1):135-42.
  9. Ahlholm P, Sipilä K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review. J Prosthodont 2018;27(1):35-41.
  10. Zeltner M, Sailer I, Mühlemann S, Özcan M, Hämmerle CH, Benic GI. Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part III: marginal and internal fit. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117(3):354-62.
  11. Sailer I, Benic GI, Fehmer V, Hämmerle CHF, Mühlemann S. Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part II: CAD-CAM versus conventional laboratory procedures. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118(1):43-8.
  12. De Angelis P, Passarelli PC, Gasparini G, Boniello R, D’Amato G, De Angelis S. Monolithic CAD-CAM lithium disilicate versus monolithic CAD-CAM zirconia for single implant-supported posterior crowns using a digital workflow: a 3-year cross-sectional retrospective study. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123(2):252-6.
  13. Cardelli P, Serafini N, Sinjari B, Murmura G, Özcan M. Reliability analysis of lithium disilicate crowns: effect of veneering and milling production workflow. J Prosthodont 2016;25(8):623-8.
  14. Magne P, Belser UC. Novel porcelain laminate preparation approach driven by a diagnostic mock-up. J Esthet Restor Dent 2004;16(1):7-16.
  15. Wismeijer D, Mans R, van Genuchten M, Reijers HA. Patients’ preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (Intraoral Scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25(10):1113-8.
  16. Lin WS, Harris BT, Ozdemir E, Morton D. Maxillary rehabilitation with a CAD/CAM-fabricated, long-term interim and anatomic contour definitive prosthesis with a digital workflow: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2013;110(1):1-7.