Digitale Anwendungen im Praxisalltag: Yes we (s)can oder wie weit wollen wir gehen?

Zusammenfassung

Die Digitalisierung ist ein Trend, der zunehmend auch den Bereich der klinischen Kieferorthopädie erobert. Die unglaublich raschen Entwicklungen auf dem Gebiet der technischen Herstellungsverfahren bedeuten zugleich auch Zeitersparnis und eine geringere Belastung für den Patienten. Selten war es mit so wenig Aufwand möglich, so viele unterschiedliche Aspekte einer einfachen kieferorthopädischen Apparatur mit nur einem Tastenklick zu verändern und individuell anzupassen. Wie sieht also die Praxis der Zukunft aus? Der vorliegende Artikel gibt konkrete Einblicke in die wunderbare Welt der digitalen Praxis und beleuchtet aus der Sicht eines Kieferorthopäden die verschiedenen Aspekte der digitalen Einflüsse und gibt Beispiele für die digitale Umsetzung.

Abstract

Digitisation is a trend which is also increasingly taking over the area of clinical orthodontics. The incredibly rapid developments in the field of technical production processes mean that time is saved at the same time and there is less of a burden for the patient. Rarely has it been possible with so little effort to change and individually adjust so many different aspects of a simple orthodontic appliance with just a single click of a button. So what does the practice of the future look like? This article gives specific insights into the wonderful world of digital practice and, from the perspective of an orthodontist examines the various aspects of digital influences and gives examples of digital implementation.

Schlüsselwörter

digitale Kieferorthopädie - CAD/CAM-Retainer - metallgedruckte Apparaturen - Rapid-Prototyping

Key words

digital orthodontics - CAD/CAM retainers - metal-printed appliances - rapid prototyping

• Literatur

• 1 Dawood A, Marti Marti B, Sauret-Jackson V. et al. 3D printing in dentistry. Br Dent J. 2015; 219: 521-529 10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.914
• 2 Wesemann C, Muallah J, Mah J. et al. Accuracy and efficiency of full-arch digitalization and 3D printing: A comparison between desktop model scanners, an intraoral scanner, a CBCT model scan, and stereolithographic 3D printing. Quintessence Int 2017; 48: 41-50 10.3290/j.qi.a37130
• 3 Aragón ML, Pontes LF, Bichara LM. et al. Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod 2016; 38: 429-434 10.1093/ejo/cjw033
• 4 Brown MW, Koroluk L, Ko CC. et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of a CAD/CAM orthodontic bracket system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148: 1067-1074 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.07.029
• 5 Müller-Hartwich R, Präger TM, Jost-Brinkmann PG. SureSmile – CAD/CAM system for orthodontic treatment planning, simulation and fabrication of customized archwires. Int J Comput Dent 2007; 10: 53-62
• 6 Pauls A, Nienkemper M, Schwestka-Polly R. et al. Therapeutic accuracy of the completely customized lingual appliance WIN: A retrospective cohort study. J Orofac Orthop 2017; 78: 52-61 10.1007/s00056-016-0058-9
• 7 Schulz R. Digitale Volumentomografie – Möglichkeiten und Grenzen in der regulären (primär nicht-chirurgischen) kieferorthopädischen Diagnostik und Therapie. Inf Orthod Kieferorthop 2016; 49: 145-150
• 8 Schulze R, Deppe H, Betz W et al. s2k-Leitlinie „Dentale digitale Volumentomographie“. 2013; Available from: URL http://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/083-005.html
• 9 European Commission. Radiation protection No 172: Cone Beam CT for Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology. Evidence Based Guidelines: A report prepared by the Sedentexct Project 2012 (v2.0)
• 10 Solaberrieta E, Garmendia A, Brizuela A. et al. Intraoral Digital Impressions for Virtual Occlusal Records: Section Quantity and Dimensions. Biomed Res Int 2016; 2016: 7173824 10.1155/2016/7173824
• 11 Patzelt SBM, Lamprinos C, Stampf S. et al. The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in-vitro comparative study. Journal of the American Dental Association 2014; 145: 542-551
• 12 Patzelt SBM, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S. et al. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2014; 18: 1687-1694 10.1007/s00784-013-1132-y
• 13 Zhang F, Suh KJ, Lee KM. Validity of Intraoral Scans Compared with Plaster Models: An In-Vivo Comparison of Dental Measurements and 3D Surface Analysis. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0157713 10.1371/journal.pone.0157713 eCollection 2016
• 14 Camardella LT, Breuning H, de Vasconcellos Vilella O. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements on plaster models and digital models created using an intraoral scanner. J Orofac Orthop 2017; 78 (03) 211-220
• 15 Al Mortadi N, Jones Q, Eggbeer D. et al. Fabrication of a resin appliance with alloy components using digital technology without an analog impression. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148: 862-867 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.06.014
• 16 Al Mortadi N, Eggbeer D, Lewis J. et al. CAD/CAM/AM aplications in the manufacture of dental appliances. Am J Orth Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 142: 727-733
• 17 Al Mortadi N, Lewis J, Eggbeer D. et al. Design and fabri tion of a sleep apnea device using computer-aided design/addit manufacture technologies. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2013; 227: 350
• 18 Goiato MC, Santos MR, Pesqueira AA. et al. Prototyping for surgical and prosthetic treatment. J Craniofac Surg 2011; 22: 914-917
• 19 Graf S. Computer-aided design and manufacture of hyrax devices: Can we go digital… for real? AJODO in press 2017
• 20 Kravitz ND, Grauer D, Schumacher P. et al. Memotain: A CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017; 151: 812-815