The present invention relates generally to dental models, and more particularly to dental models having a jaw component and demountable components, such as tooth components and/or implant analogue components, that can be accurately mounted to the jaw component and removed multiple times. In many embodiments, the dental models disclosed herein can be fabricated using additive manufacturing techniques such as stereo-lithography (SLA) and three-dimensional printing.
In the preparation of dental crowns, bridges, and implants, a physical model of the jaw is often used. These jaw models represent the patient's jaw in the vicinity of the crown(s), bridge(s), or implant(s) being prepared. Existing approaches for the preparation of these jaw models have included milling the jaw model from a solid block of material. Such milled jaw models, however, lack desirable features, such as demountable portions that can be accurately positioned when mounted and selectively removed to better facilitate the preparation of the applicable dental crown, bridge, and/or implant.
Thus, improved dental models and related methods are desirable, particularly dental models with demountable portions that can be repeatedly accurately mounted and demounted.
The following presents a simplified summary of some embodiments of the invention in order to provide a basic understanding of the invention. This summary is not an extensive overview of the invention. It is not intended to identify key/critical elements of the invention or to delineate the scope of the invention. Its sole purpose is to present some embodiments of the invention in a simplified form as a prelude to the more detailed description that is presented later.
The present invention includes dental models, as well as related systems and methods, including methods of use and manufacture or fabrication. In one embodiment, a dental model can include a first component configured to represent a portion of a patient's jaw and a second component that is demountably attachable to the first component. The second component can represent a dental structure of interest, such as the remaining portion of a tooth or a dental implant. The interface between the first and second components includes contact with locally protruding portions on the first component and/or on the second component. In many embodiments, the first component defines a socket and the second component includes a shaft that is received by the socket and interfaces with the socket. The locally protruding portions provide increased compliance that accommodates a design range of interference fit between the first and second components.
For a fuller understanding of the nature and advantages of the present invention, reference should be made to the ensuing detailed description and accompanying drawings.
All publications, patents, and patent applications mentioned in this specification are herein incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication, patent, or patent application was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference.
In the following description, various embodiments of the present invention will be described. For purposes of explanation, specific configurations and details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the embodiments. However, it will also be apparent to one skilled in the art that the present invention may be practiced without the specific details. Furthermore, well-known features may be omitted or simplified in order not to obscure the embodiment being described.
In the preparation of dental crowns, bridges, and implants, a physical model of the jaw of a patient is often used. The physical model can include one or more preparations and/or one or more input analogs, as appropriate for the application. In the past, these models were generally milled from a solid block of material.
Advantageously, the dental models disclosed herein can be made using additive manufacturing (AM) techniques such as stereolithography (SLA) and 3D printing. The difference in material properties and the manufacturing techniques for dental models that can be made using AM techniques as compared to traditional milled dental models give rise to different requirements and priorities in the design of the models. If, however, a material used to fabricate a dental model as disclosed herein has suitable mechanical properties, the dental model may also be fabricated using existing milling techniques. Constraints on model geometry associated with existing milling techniques, however, may limit the application of existing milling techniques in the fabrication of the dental models disclosed herein.
The models disclosed herein generally include two or more components. One component represents a portion of a patient's jaw in the vicinity of the applicable crown(s), bridge(s), and/or implant(s) to be prepared. This first component is also referred to herein as a jaw component. One or more other components are made that are detachably mountable to the jaw component. These one or more other components represent, for example, each tooth to be crowned and/or each tooth that will support a bridge. These one or more other components can be made to match, typically as closely as possible, the corresponding actual dental geometry of the patient. For example, for the preparation of a crown, a component can represent the geometry of the remaining portion of the tooth to be crowned. Such a component may be referred to herein as a “die” since it can be used as a die to form interfacing portions of the crown that is prepared. Such a component may also be referred to herein as a “tooth component”. When dental implants are involved, one or more of these other components can represent the abutment mounting features of the implant(s) as they are located in the patient's jaw. Such components that represent abutment mounting features of an implant(s) may be referred to herein as an “implant analog component.” Each of these other components (e.g., die, tooth component, implant analog component) have features configured to interface with corresponding features of the jaw component such that these other components can be repeatedly mounted to the jaw component so as to be accurately located relative to the tooth and gingiva geometry on the jaw component.
In many embodiments, the jaw component includes at least one socket configured to interface with a shaft portion of a die, tooth component, and/or implant analog component. The socket(s) and/or the shaft portion(s) need not be a single continuous shape. For example, the shaft portion can include two separate shaft segments that mate with a socket that includes two corresponding receptacles. And while in the examples and embodiments described herein the socket is generally concave and the shaft is generally convex (as illustrated by the choice of terminology), any other suitable configurations in conformance with the coupling approaches described herein can be used.
To facilitate the fabrication of crowns or bridges, one or more dice and/or one or more tooth analog components may be mounted to and demounted from the jaw component a number of times. One or more implant analog components may also be mounted to and demounted from the jaw component a number of times, though typically only a few times. It is a design goal of the dental models disclosed herein that each time the die, tooth component, and/or implant analog component is inserted that it reach and remain in a position that accurately represents the position of the corresponding preparations and/or implants in the patient's jaw.
Milled dental models are generally made from relatively stiff materials. Properly executed, existing milling techniques can produce a highly accurate finished surface. Existing milling techniques, however, may be limited in their ability to produce small features due to cutter diameter limitations arising from strength, wear, machining time, and cost considerations. In some milled models, the socket and shaft have matching sections taken across insertion direction with the addition of a very small clearance between these two components. Friction between these components is used to keep these components coupled together in a desired relative position. In such a design, a trade-off is made between having a relatively small clearance to keep the position accurate and constant and having a relatively large clearance that may be necessary so that the die, tooth component, and/or analog can be inserted into the socket without friction induced jamming that may arise due to tolerance variations and/or misalignment. Additionally, milled models may also require the use of expensive four- or five-axis milling machines, special cutters (with further diameter limitations), and/or multiple set-ups to create geometry with undercuts as is typical on teeth.
AM materials can have a fairly wide range of mechanical properties. AM materials include suitable polymers. For a dental model geometry that is theoretically machineable, currently available AM machines may not achieve as accurate a surface as is possible by milling. Currently available AM machines are, however, able to produce much smaller concave features than milling and are able to produce undercuts without further special considerations. Although AM machine generated surfaces may have artifacts due to the layering and sometimes lateral resolution, state-of-the-art AM machines can more easily produce small curved details better than existing milling techniques. AM layering effects, however, can cause problems. For example, when two AM fabricated components slide against each other perpendicular to the layering direction, layering effects can create mechanical interlocking that generates high sliding frictional forces.
In the dental models disclosed herein, excessive sliding frictional forces are avoided by including one or more compliant features (or locally protruding portions) as part of the shaft, the socket, or both. The compliant features are configured to accurately locate the shaft in the socket. The compliant features are designed with dimensions and placement to accommodate manufacturing variations in the shaft and socket such that the components can be coupled together in all possible combinations of large and small sockets and shafts without generating too high or too low of the associated interface forces. For example, when a shaft having a minimum dimension is coupled to a socket having a maximum dimension, there is still a suitable level of contact between the compliant portions and their mating features so that the compliant features will have a suitable minimum level of compression, thereby generating a suitable minimum force between the components such that the shaft is not loose in the socket. This minimum force is sufficiently high to generate a friction force sufficient to keep the shaft from moving relative to the socket. In the tightest fit scenario, the compliance features are configured to accommodate the increased level of compression without generating interface forces that are above a suitable level. The compliance features are configured to accommodate the overall range of possible compression levels through a combination of geometry and material properties, examples of which are described herein.
The compliant features (or locally protruding portions) can be configured in a variety of ways, e.g., to include a compliance configured to accommodate an interference fit between the components described herein (e.g., between a jaw component and a tooth component). In some embodiments, the compliant features (or locally protruding portions) can have a compliance (or compression property) that allows for the features to compress when one component (e.g., a jaw component) is engaged with another component (e.g., a tooth component). This compliance (e.g., ability to compress) can be tailored to provide a desired interference fit between the two components.
In certain aspects, the structure and/or position of the compliant features (or locally protruding portions can be configured to achieve a desired interference fit. For example, locally protruding portions can be formed on a shaft portion of a tooth component. The dimensions of the shaft can be configured to fit in a socket of a jaw component. To achieve a desired interference fit between the components, the locally protruding portions can be made to have a structure that expands the local dimensions of the shaft such that there is an overlap between the width of the shaft and the width of the socket. Due at least in part to the configured compliance (or compressive property) of the locally protruding portion, the shaft can be fit securely and accurately in the socket with minimal, if any, movement between the tooth and jaw components. Depending on the properties (e.g., compliance) of a material, the locally protruding portions (or compliant features) can be manufactured to have dimensions that correspond with a given compliance for the material. In an example embodiment, a socket in a jaw component may have a width of about 5 mm. The shaft of the tooth component can similarly have a width of about 5 mm. Owing to, e.g., error in a manufacturing process, the shaft and socket may not fit properly together. Locally protruding portions (or compliant features) can be used to produce a desired interference fit between the two components. For example, a locally protruding portion on the shaft and/or the socket can be made to increase the width of either the shaft and/or socket by a predetermined dimension. In some embodiments, the locally protruding portion (or compliant feature) can be configured to increase the width of the shaft or socket by 50 microns. Due at least in part to the compliance of the locally protruding portion, the locally protruding portion can compress and allow for a desired interference fit between the two components. In some embodiments, the locally protruding portion can be designed to increase dimensions of one component compared to another component over a wide range. For example, a dimension (e.g., width) of one component can be longer than a dimension of a second component over a range, such as between about 10 microns to about 100 microns, between about 20 microns to about 80 microns, or from about 40 microns to about 60 microns. In some embodiments, the dimension of one component (e.g., a shaft of a component) can be different than another component (e.g., a socket) by a predetermined percentage. For example, a width of a shaft at a locally protruding portion can be about 1%, or about 2%, or about 3%, or about 4% or about 5% wider than a socket width. It will be generally recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art that a variety of dimensions can be manufactured and used to tailor both compliance of the protruding portions and/or interference fit between the components. In certain embodiments, the compliance can be tailored according to the material used to make the components and/or by the shape or structure of the compliant feature. For example, folded springs can be used generate compliant features that are more compliant than, e.g., a ridge or ball structure on a component. The spring, e.g., can be structurally designed to compress upon application of force due in-part to the structure of the spring. The ridge or ball structure may have a compliance that is more dependent on the compliance properties of the material used to make the components. The various combinations of compliance for the various compliant features (or locally protruding portions) described herein and tailored interference fit between the various components described herein can be predetermined according to factor such as the properties of the materials, the dimensions of the locally protruding portions, and/or the locations of the locally protruding portions.
Referring now to the drawings, in which like reference numerals represent like parts throughout the several views,
In the dental models 10, 30, the lateral position accuracy depends on the positional accuracy of the interfacing registration surfaces of the shaft portion and the socket. The lateral position accuracy of existing AM techniques, however, may be insufficient to produce a desired level of positional accuracy. In general, the insertion direction for the shaft portion may not be perpendicular to the AM build layers, so it may not be possible to ensure that side walls of the registration features are exactly aligned with positions that can be built by the AM device (i.e. not between steps of a stepper motor or between counts of an encoder used to position the laser or print head). In this case, better accuracy may be achieved by averaging the errors of opposing faces of the shaft or socket, a concept that can be extended from rectangular through polygons with more sides and also to circular, elliptical, or other shapes.
The number of contacts can be reduced, for example, until there are only six contact points, which define a kinematic mount. The addition of a suitably placed seventh contact can create an opposing force on the other contact points, so that the shaft is firmly positioned in the socket, rather than being dependent on an outside force, typically gravity, to ensure that all the contacts remain touching. In practice, because of resolution limitations associated with AM fabrication of a single surface, it may be preferable to use a greater number of opposed contacts to average out the position error of the surfaces.
While most of the embodiments described herein use a rectangular shaft, any other suitable shape, for example a triangular shaft, can also be used. The shaft shape employed can be somewhat independent of the number of contacts. For example, instead of using four contact spheres near the bottom of the shaft and four near the top, three near the bottom and three near the top can be used with each sphere having two points of contact with adjacent faces of the socket. A shaft of any suitable shape (e.g., triangular, rectangular, pentagon, etc.) can be used to connect the spheres.
Note that the hole through the shaft shown in
Most of the embodiments described herein have the compliant features on the shaft. Nearly all of the described embodiments, however, can be reconfigured to place the compliant features on the socket instead. Additional embodiments can use a mixture of locations for the compliant features with some on the shaft and some on the socket. For AM techniques using a solid support material, such as Objet, it may be preferable to put the compliant features on the shaft in order to avoid small concave features from which the support material is difficult to remove, assuming that the shaft is the generally convex and the socket concave as in many embodiments. For other AM techniques, other considerations may guide the choice of where to locate the compliant features.
Although not shown in many of the embodiments illustrated herein, it may be preferable to configure the contact points such that the die can only be inserted in one orientation. A keying feature can also be used to prevent incorrect orientations.
Implant analog components typically provide mounting features for an abutment that is used to create a crown. The loads on such mounting features can be relatively high making it preferable that the analog be metal. When the analog is metal, cost considerations and material properties may make it preferable to put compliance features in the socket instead of on the analog.
Other variations are within the spirit of the present invention. Thus, while the invention is susceptible to various modifications and alternative constructions, certain illustrated embodiments thereof are shown in the drawings and have been described above in detail. It should be understood, however, that there is no intention to limit the invention to the specific form or forms disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, alternative constructions, and equivalents falling within the spirit and scope of the invention, as defined in the appended claims.
The use of the terms “a” and “an” and “the” and similar referents in the context of describing the invention (especially in the context of the following claims) are to be construed to cover both the singular and the plural, unless otherwise indicated herein or clearly contradicted by context. The terms “comprising,” “having,” “including,” and “containing” are to be construed as open-ended terms (i.e., meaning “including, but not limited to,”) unless otherwise noted. The term “connected” is to be construed as partly or wholly contained within, attached to, or joined together, even if there is something intervening. Recitation of ranges of values herein are merely intended to serve as a shorthand method of referring individually to each separate value falling within the range, unless otherwise indicated herein, and each separate value is incorporated into the specification as if it were individually recited herein. All methods described herein can be performed in any suitable order unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context. The use of any and all examples, or exemplary language (e.g., “such as”) provided herein, is intended merely to better illuminate embodiments of the invention and does not pose a limitation on the scope of the invention unless otherwise claimed. No language in the specification should be construed as indicating any non-claimed element as essential to the practice of the invention.
Preferred embodiments of this invention are described herein, including the best mode known to the inventors for carrying out the invention. Variations of those preferred embodiments may become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art upon reading the foregoing description. The inventors expect skilled artisans to employ such variations as appropriate, and the inventors intend for the invention to be practiced otherwise than as specifically described herein. Accordingly, this invention includes all modifications and equivalents of the subject matter recited in the claims appended hereto as permitted by applicable law. Moreover, any combination of the above-described elements in all possible variations thereof is encompassed by the invention unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context.
All references, including publications, patent applications, and patents, cited herein are hereby incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each reference were individually and specifically indicated to be incorporated by reference and were set forth in its entirety herein.
This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/773,229, filed Feb. 21, 2013, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,375,298, issued Jun. 28, 2016, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/601,448, filed Feb. 21, 2012, the entire contents of which are incorporated by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2467432 | Kesling | Apr 1949 | A |
3286350 | Cooper | Nov 1966 | A |
3407500 | Kesling | Oct 1968 | A |
3600808 | Reeve | Aug 1971 | A |
3660900 | Andrews | May 1972 | A |
3683502 | Wallshein | Aug 1972 | A |
3738005 | Cohen | Jun 1973 | A |
3860803 | Levine | Jan 1975 | A |
3916526 | Schudy | Nov 1975 | A |
3922786 | Lavin | Dec 1975 | A |
3950851 | Bergersen | Apr 1976 | A |
3983628 | Acevedo | Oct 1976 | A |
4014096 | Dellinger | Mar 1977 | A |
4195046 | Kesling | Mar 1980 | A |
4253828 | Coles et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
4324546 | Heitlinger et al. | Apr 1982 | A |
4324547 | Arcan et al. | Apr 1982 | A |
4348178 | Kurz | Sep 1982 | A |
4478580 | Barrut | Oct 1984 | A |
4500294 | Lewis | Feb 1985 | A |
4504225 | Yoshii | Mar 1985 | A |
4505673 | Yoshii | Mar 1985 | A |
4526540 | Dellinger | Jul 1985 | A |
4575330 | Hull | Mar 1986 | A |
4575805 | Moermann et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4591341 | Andrews | May 1986 | A |
4609349 | Cain | Sep 1986 | A |
4611288 | Duret et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
4656860 | Orthuber et al. | Apr 1987 | A |
4663720 | Duret et al. | May 1987 | A |
4664626 | Kesling | May 1987 | A |
4676747 | Kesling | Jun 1987 | A |
4742464 | Duret et al. | May 1988 | A |
4755139 | Abbatte et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4763791 | Halverson et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4793803 | Martz | Dec 1988 | A |
4798534 | Breads | Jan 1989 | A |
4836778 | Baumrind et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4837732 | Brandestini et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4850864 | Diamond | Jul 1989 | A |
4850865 | Napolitano | Jul 1989 | A |
4856991 | Breads et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4877398 | Kesling | Oct 1989 | A |
4880380 | Martz | Nov 1989 | A |
4889238 | Batchelor | Dec 1989 | A |
4890608 | Steer | Jan 1990 | A |
4935635 | O'Harra | Jun 1990 | A |
4936862 | Walker et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4937928 | van der Zel | Jul 1990 | A |
4941826 | Loran et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4964770 | Steinbichler et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4975052 | Spencer et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
4983334 | AdelI | Jan 1991 | A |
5011405 | Lemchen | Apr 1991 | A |
5017133 | Miura | May 1991 | A |
5027281 | Rekow et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5035613 | Breads et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5055039 | Abbatte et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5059118 | Breads et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5100316 | Wildman | Mar 1992 | A |
5106229 | Blackwell | Apr 1992 | A |
5121333 | Riley et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5125832 | Kesling | Jun 1992 | A |
5128870 | Erdman et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5130064 | Smalley | Jul 1992 | A |
5131843 | Hilgers et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5131844 | Marinaccio et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5139419 | Andreiko et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5145364 | Martz et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5176517 | Truax | Jan 1993 | A |
5184306 | Erdman et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5186623 | Breads et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5197874 | Silva et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5257203 | Riley et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5273429 | Rekow et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5278756 | Lemchen et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5328362 | Watson et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5338198 | Wu et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5340309 | Robertson | Aug 1994 | A |
5342202 | Deshayes | Aug 1994 | A |
5368478 | Andreiko et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5382164 | Stern | Jan 1995 | A |
5395238 | Andreiko et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5440326 | Quinn | Aug 1995 | A |
5440496 | Andersson et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5447432 | Andreiko et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5452219 | Dehoff et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5454717 | Andreiko et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5456600 | Andreiko et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5431562 | Andreiko et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5474448 | Andreiko et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
RE35169 | Lemchen et al. | Mar 1996 | E |
5518397 | Andreiko et al. | May 1996 | A |
5528735 | Strasnick et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5533895 | Andreiko et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5542842 | Andreiko et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5549476 | Stern | Aug 1996 | A |
5562448 | Mushabac | Oct 1996 | A |
5587912 | Andersson et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5605459 | Kuroda et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5607305 | Andersson et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5614075 | Andre | Mar 1997 | A |
5621648 | Crump | Apr 1997 | A |
5645420 | Bergersen | Jul 1997 | A |
5645421 | Slootsky | Jul 1997 | A |
5655653 | Chester | Aug 1997 | A |
5683243 | Andreiko et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5692894 | Schwartz et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5725376 | Poirier | Mar 1998 | A |
5725378 | Wang | Mar 1998 | A |
5733126 | Andersson et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5740267 | Echerer et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742700 | Yoon et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5788490 | Huffman | Aug 1998 | A |
5799100 | Clarke et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5800174 | Andersson | Sep 1998 | A |
5823778 | Schmitt et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5848115 | Little et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5857853 | van Nifterick et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5866058 | Batchelder et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5879158 | Doyle et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5880961 | Crump | Mar 1999 | A |
5880962 | Andersson et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5934288 | Avila et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5957686 | Anthony | Sep 1999 | A |
5964587 | Sato | Oct 1999 | A |
5971754 | Sondhi et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5975893 | Chishti et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6015289 | Andreiko et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6044309 | Honda | Mar 2000 | A |
6049743 | Baba | Apr 2000 | A |
6062861 | Andersson | May 2000 | A |
6068482 | Snow | May 2000 | A |
6099314 | Kopelman et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6116070 | Oshida et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6123544 | Cleary | Sep 2000 | A |
6152731 | Jordon et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6183248 | Chishti et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6190165 | Andreiko et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6217325 | Chishti et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6217334 | Hultgren | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6244861 | Andreiko et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6309215 | Phan et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6315553 | Sachdeva et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6322359 | Jordan et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6350120 | Sachdeva et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6382975 | Poirier | May 2002 | B1 |
6398548 | Muhammad et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6402707 | Ernst | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6482298 | Bhatnagar | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6524101 | Phan et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6554611 | Chishti et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6572372 | Phan et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6629840 | Chishti et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6705863 | Phan et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6719562 | Oestreich | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6722880 | Chishti et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
9375298 | Boronkay et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
20020006597 | Andreiko et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20030009252 | Pavlovskaia et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030139834 | Nikolskiy et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030203334 | Hedge et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030211444 | Andrews | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030224311 | Cronauer | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040128010 | Pavlovskaia et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050055118 | Nikolskiy et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20060127855 | Wen | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20070212613 | Ishida et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20110236849 | Pogorelsky | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120237903 | Klare et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20130216980 | Boronkay et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
3031677 | May 1979 | AU |
517102 | Jul 1981 | AU |
5598894 | Jun 1994 | AU |
1121955 | Apr 1982 | CA |
2749802 | May 1978 | DE |
69327661 | Jul 2000 | DE |
0091876 | Oct 1983 | EP |
0299490 | Jan 1989 | EP |
0376873 | Jul 1990 | EP |
0490848 | Jun 1992 | EP |
0541500 | May 1993 | EP |
0667753 | Aug 1995 | EP |
0731673 | Sep 1996 | EP |
0774933 | May 1997 | EP |
463897 | Jan 1980 | ES |
2369828 | Jun 1978 | FR |
2652256 | Mar 1991 | FR |
15500777 | Aug 1979 | GB |
53-058191 | May 1978 | JP |
04-028359 | Jan 1992 | JP |
08-508174 | Sep 1996 | JP |
WO 9008512 | Aug 1990 | WO |
WO 9104713 | Apr 1991 | WO |
WO 9410935 | May 1994 | WO |
WO 9832394 | Jul 1998 | WO |
WO 9844865 | Oct 1998 | WO |
WO 9858596 | Dec 1998 | WO |
Entry |
---|
AADR. American Association for Dental Research, Summary of Activities, Mar. 20-23, 1980, Los ngeles, CA, p. 195. |
Alcaniz, et aL, “An Advanced System for the Simulation and Planning of Orthodontic Treatments,” Karl Heinz Hohne and Ron Kikinis (eds.), Visualization in Biomedical Computing, 4th Intl. Conf., VBC '96, Hamburg, Germany, Sep. 22-25, 1996, Springer-Verlag, pp. 511-520. |
Alexander et al., “The DigiGraph Work Station Part 2 Clinical Management,” JCO, pp. 402-407 (Jul. 1990). |
Altschuler et al., “Analysis of 3-D Data for Comparative 3-D Serial Growth Pattern Studies of Oral-Facial Structures,” AADR Abstracts, Program and Abstracts of Papers, 57th General Session, IADR Annual Session, Mar. 29, 1979-Apr. 1, 1979, New Orleans Marriot, Journal of Dental Research, vol. 58, Jan. 1979, Special Issue A, p. 221. |
Altschuler et al., “Laser Electro-Optic System for Rapid Three-Dimensional (3D) Topographic Mapping of Surfaces,” Optical Engineering, 20(6):953-961 (1981). |
Altschuler et al., “Measuring Surfaces Space-Coded by a Laser-Projected Dot Matrix,” SPIE Imaging q Applications for Automated Industrial Inspection and Assembly, vol. 182, p. 187-191 (1979). |
Altschuler, “3D Mapping of Maxillo-Facial Prosthesis,” AADR Abstract #607, 2 pages total, (1980). |
Andersson et al., “Clinical Results with Titanium Crowns Fabricated with Machine Duplication and Spark Erosion,” Acta. Odontol. Scand., 47:279-286 (1989). |
Andrews, The Six Keys to Optimal Occlusion Straight Wire, Chapter 3, pp. 13-24 (1989). |
Bartels, et al., An Introduction to Splines for Use in Computer Graphics and Geometric Modeling, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, pp. 422-425 (1987). |
Baumrind et al., “A Stereophotogrammetric System for the Detection of Prosthesis Loosening in Total Hip Arthroplasty,” NATO Symposium on Applications of Human Biostereometrics, Jul. 9-13, 1978, SPIE, vol. 166, pp. 112-123. |
Baumrind et al., “Mapping the Skull in 3-D,” reprinted from J. Calif. Dent. Assoc., 48(2), 11 pages total, (1972 Fall Issue). |
Baumrind, “A System for Craniofacial Mapping Through the Integration of Data from Stereo X-Ray Films and Stereo Photographs,” an invited paper submitted to the 1975 American Society of Photogram Symposium on Close-Range Photogram Systems, University of III., Aug. 26-30, 1975, pp. 142-166. |
Baumrind, “Integrated Three-Dimensional Craniofacial Mapping: Background, Principles, and Perspectives,” Semin. in Orthod., 7(4):223-232 (Dec. 2001). |
Begole et al., “A Computer System for the Analysis of Dental Casts,” The Angle Orthod., 51(3):253-259 (Jul. 1981). |
Bernard et al.,“Computerized Diagnosis in Orthodontics for Epidemiological Studies: A ProgressReport,” Abstract, J. Dental Res. Special Issue, vol. 67, p. 169, paper presented at International Association for Dental Research 66th General Session, Mar. 9-13, 1988, Montreal, Canada. |
Bhatia et al., “A Computer-Aided Design for Orthognathic Surgery,” Br. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg., 22:237-253 (1984). |
Biggerstaff et al., “Computerized Analysis of Occlusion in the Postcanine Dentition,” Am. J. Orthod., 61(3): 245-254 (Mar. 1972). |
Biggerstaff, “Computerized Diagnostic Setups and Simulations,” Angle Orthod., 40(1):28-36 (Jan. 1970). |
Biostar Opeation & Training Manual. Great Lakes Orthodontics, Ltd. 199 Fire Tower Drive,Tonawanda, New York. 14150-5890, 20 pages total (1990). |
Blu, et al., “Linear interpolation revitalized”, IEEE Trans. Image Proc., 13(5):710-719 (May 2004). |
Bourke, “Coordinate System Transformation,” (Jun. 1996), p. 1, retrieved from the Internet Nov. 5, 2004, URL <http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/—pbourke/prolection/coords>. |
Boyd et al., “Three Dimensional Diagnosis and Orthodontic Treatment of Complex Malocclusions With the Invisalipn Appliance,” Semin. Orthod., 7(4):274-293 (Dec. 2001). |
Brandestini et al., “Computer Machined Ceramic Inlays: In Vitro Marginal Adaptation,” J. Dent. Res. Special Issue, Abstract 305, vol. 64, p. 208 (1985). |
Brook et al., “An Image Analysis System for the Determination of Tooth Dimensions from Study Casts: Comparison with Manual Measurements of Mesio-distal Diameter,” J. Dent. Res., 65(3):428-431 (Mar. 1986). |
Burstone (interview), “Dr. Charles J. Burstone on The Uses of the Computer in Orthodontic Practice (Part 1),” J. Clin. Orthod., 13(7):442-453 (Jul. 1979). |
Burstone (interview), “Dr. Charles J. Burstone on The Uses of the Computer in Orthodontic Practice (Part 2),” J. Clin. Orthod., 13(8):539-551 (Aug. 1979). |
Burstone et al., Precision Adjustment of the Transpalatal Lingual Arch: Computer Arch Form Predetermination, Am, Journal of Orthodontics, vol. 79, No. 2 (Feb. 1981), pp. 115-133. |
Cardinal Industrial Finishes, Powder Coatings information posted at <http://www.cardinalpaint.com> on Aug. 25, 2000, 2 pages. |
Carnaghan, “An Alternative to Holograms for the Portrayal of Human Teeth,” 4th Int'l. Conf. on Holographic Systems, Components and Applications, Sep. 15, 1993, pp. 228-231. |
Chaconas et al., “The DigiGraph Work Station, Part 1, Basic Concepts,” JCO, pp. 360-367 (Jun. 1990). |
Chafetz et al., “Subsidence of the Femoral Prosthesis, A Stereophotogrammetric Evaluation,” Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res., No. 201, pp. 60-67 (Dec. 1985). |
Chiappone, (1980). Constructing the Gnathologic Setup and Positioner, J. Clin. Orthod, vol. 14, pp. 121-133. |
Cottingham, (1969). Gnathologic Clear Plastic Positioner, Am. J. Orthod, vol. 55, pp. 23-31. |
Crawford, “CAD/CAM in the Dental Office: Does It Work?”, Canadian Dental Journal, vol. 57, No. 2, pp. 121-123 (Feb. 1991). |
Crawford, “Computers in Dentistry: Part 1: CAD/CAM: The Computer Moves Chairside,” “Part 2: F. Duret—A Man With a Vision,” “Part 3: The Computer Gives New Vision—Literally,” “Part 4: Bytes 'N Bites” The Computer Moves From the Front Desk to the Operatory, Canadian Dental Journal, vol. 54(9), pp. 661-666 (1988). |
Crooks, “CAD/CAM Comes to USC,” USC Dentistry, pp. 14-17 (Spring 1990). |
Cureton, Correcting Malaligned Mandibular Incisors with Removable Retainers, J. Clin. Orthod, vol. 30, No. 7 (1996) pp. 390-395. |
Curry et al., “Integrated Three-Dimensional Craniofacial Mapping at the Craniofacial Research Instrumentation Laboratory/University of the Pacific,” Semin. Orthod., 7(4):258-265 (Dec. 2001). |
Cutting et al., “Three-Dimensional Computer-Assisted Design of Craniofacial Surgical Procedures: Optimization and Interaction with Cephalometric and CT-Based Models,” Plast. 77(6):877-885 (Jun. 1986). |
DCS Dental AG, “The CAD/CAM ‘DCS Titan System’ for Production of Crowns/Bridges,” DSC Production, pp. 1-7 (Jan. 1992. |
Definition for gingiva. Dictionary.com p. 1-3. Retrieved from the internet Nov. 5, 2004 <http://reference.com/search/search?q=gingiva>. |
Defranco et al., “Three-Dimensional Large Displacement Analysis of Orthodontic Appliances,” J. Biomechanics, 9:793-801 (1976). |
Dental Institute University of Zurich Switzerland, Program for International Symposium on Computer Restorations: State of the Art of the CEREC-Method, May 1991, 2 pages total. |
Dentrac Corporation, Dentrac document, pp. 4-13 (1992). |
Dent-X posted on Sep. 24, 1998 at <http://www.dent-x.com/DentSim.htm>, 6 pages. |
Doyle, “Digital Dentistry,” Computer Graphics World, pp. 50-52, 54 (Oct. 2000). |
DuraClearTM product information, Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab, 1 page (1997). |
Duret et al, “CAD-CAM in Dentistry,” J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 117:715-720 (Nov. 1988). |
Duret et al., “CAD/CAM Imaging in Dentistry,” Curr. Opin. Dent., 1:150-154 (1991). |
Duret, “The Dental CAD/CAM, General Description of the Project,” Hennson International Product Brochure, 18 pages total, Jan. 1986. |
Duret,“Vers Une Prosthese Informatisee,” (English translation attached), Tonus, vol. 75, pp. 55-57 (Nov. 15, 1985). |
Economides, “The Microcomputer in the Orthodontic Office,” JCO, pp. 767-772 (Nov. 1979). |
Elsasser, Some Observations on the History and Uses of the Kesling Positioner, Am. J. Orthod. (1950) 36:368-374. |
English translation of Japanese Laid-Open Publication No. 63-11148 to inventor T. Ozukuri (Laid-Open on Jan. 18, 1998) pp. 1-7. |
Felton et al., “A Computerized Analysis of the Shape and Stability of Mandibular Arch Form,” Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop., 92(6):478-483 (Dec. 1987). |
Friede et al., “Accuracy of Cephalometric Prediction in Orthognathic Surgery,” Abstract of Papers, J. Dent. Res., 70:754-760 (1987). |
Futterling et a/., “Automated Finite Element Modeling of a Human Mandible with Dental Implants,” JS WSCG '98—Conference Program, retrieved from the Internet: <http://wscg.zcu.cz/wscg98/papers98/Strasser 98.pdf>, 8 pages. |
Gao et al., “3-D element Generation for Multi-Connected Complex Dental and Mandibular Structure,” Proc. Intl Workshop on Medical Imaging and Augmented Reality, pp. 267-271 (Jun. 12, 2001). |
Gim-Alldent Deutschland, “Das DUX System: Die Technik,” 2 pages total (2002). |
Gottleib et al., “JCO Interviews Dr. James A. McNamura, Jr., on the Frankel Appliance: Part 2: Clinical 1-1 Management,”J. Clin. Orthod., 16(6):390-407 (Jun. 1982). |
Grayson, “New Methods for Three Dimensional Analysis of Craniofacial Deformity, Symposium: Computerized Facial Imaging in Oral and Maxiiofacial Surgery,” AAOMS, 3 pages total, (Sep. 13, 1990). |
Guess et al., “Computer Treatment Estimates in Orthodontics and Orthognathic Surgery,” JCO, pp. 262-28 (Apr. 1989). |
Heaven et al. “Computer-Based Image Analysis of Artificial Root Surface Caries,” Abstracts of Papers, J. Dent. Res., 70:528 (Apr. 17-21, 1991). |
Highbeam Research, “Simulating Stress Put on Jaw,” Tooling & Production [online], Nov. 1996, n pp. 1-2, retrieved from the Internet on Nov. 5, 2004, URL http://static.highbeam.com/t/toolingampproduction/november011996/simulatingstressputonfa . . . >. |
Hikage, “Integrated Orthodontic Management System for Virtual Three-Dimensional Computer Graphic Simulation and Optical Video Image Database for Diagnosis and Treatment Planning”, Journal of Japan KA Orthodontic Society, Feb. 1987, English translation, pp. 1-38, Japanese version, 46(2), pp. 248-269 (60 pages total). |
Hoffmann, et al., “Role of Cephalometry for Planning of Jaw Orthopedics and Jaw Surgery Procedures,” (Article Summary in English, article in German), lnformatbnen, pp. 375-396 (Mar. 1991). |
Hojjatie et al., “Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Glass-Ceramic Dental Crowns,” J. Biomech., 23(11):1157-1166 (1990). |
Huckins, “CAD-CAM Generated Mandibular Model Prototype from MRI Data,” AAOMS, p. 96 (1999). |
Important Tip About Wearing the Red White & Blue Active Clear Retainer System, Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab, 1 page 1998). |
JCO Interviews, Craig Andreiko , DDS, MS on the Elan and Orthos Systems, JCO, pp. 459-468 (Aug. 1994). |
JCO Interviews, Dr. Homer W. Phillips on Computers in Orthodontic Practice, Part 2, JCO. 1997; 1983:819-831. |
Jerrold, “The Problem, Electronic Data Transmission and the Law,” AJO-DO, pp. 478-479 (Apr. 1988). |
Jones et al., “An Assessment of the Fit of a Parabolic Curve to Pre- and Post-Treatment Dental Arches,” Br. J. Orthod., 16:85-93 (1989). |
JP Faber et al., “Computerized Interactive Orthodontic Treatment Planning,” Am. J. Orthod., 73(1):36-46 (Jan. 1978). |
Kamada et al., Case Reports on Tooth Positioners Using LTV Vinyl Silicone Rubber, J. Nihon University School of Dentistry (1984) 26(1): 11-29. |
Kamada et al., Construction of Tooth Positioners with LTV Vinyl Silicone Rubber and Some Case KJ Reports, J. Nihon University School of Dentistry (1982) 24(1):1-27. |
Kanazawa et al., “Three-Dimensional Measurements of the Occlusal Surfaces of Upper Molars in a Dutch Population,” J. Dent Res., 63(11):1298-1301 (Nov. 1984). |
Kesling et al., The Philosophy of the Tooth Positioning Appliance, American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral surgery. 1945; 31:297-304. |
Kesling, Coordinating the Predetermined Pattern and Tooth Positioner with Conventional Treatment, Am. J. Orthod. Oral Surg. (1946) 32:285-293. |
Kleeman et al., The Speed Positioner, J. Clin. Orthod. (1996) 30:673-680. |
Kochanek, “Interpolating Splines with Local Tension, Continuity and Bias Control,” Computer Graphics, 18(3):33-41 (Jul. 1984). Oral Surgery (1945) 31 :297-30. |
Kunii et al., “Articulation Simulation for an Intelligent Dental Care System,” Displays 15:181-188 (1994). |
Kuroda et al., Three-Dimensional Dental Cast Analyzing System Using Laser Scanning, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. (1996) 110:365-369. |
Laurendeau, et al., “A Computer-Vision Technique for the Acquisition and Processing of 3-D Profiles of 7 Dental Imprints: An Application in Orthodontics,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 10(3):453-461 (Sep. 1991). |
Leinfelder, et al., “A New Method for Generating Ceramic Restorations: a CAD-CAM System,” J. Am. 1-1 Dent. Assoc., 118(6):703-707 (Jun. 1989). |
Manetti, et al., “Computer-Aided Cefalometry and New Mechanics in Orthodontics,” (Article Summary in English, article in German), Fortschr Kieferorthop. 44, 370-376 (Nr. 5), 1983. |
McCann, “Inside the ADA,” J. Amer. Dent. Assoc., 118:286-294 (Mar. 1989). |
McNamara et al., “Invisible Retainers,” J. Cfin. Orthod., pp. 570-578 (Aug. 1985). |
McNamara et al., Orthodontic and Orthopedic Treatment in the Mixed Dentition, Needham Press, pp. 347-353 (Jan. 1993). |
Moermann et al., “Computer Machined Adhesive Porcelain Inlays: Margin Adaptation after Fatigue Stress,” IADR Abstract 339, J. Dent. Res., 66(a):763 (1987). |
Moles, “Correcting Mild Malalignments—As Easy as One, Two, Three,” AOA/Pro Corner, vol. 11, No. 1, 2 pages (2002). |
Mormann et al., “Marginale Adaptation von adhasuven Porzellaninlays in vitro,” Separatdruck aus:Schweiz. Mschr. Zahnmed. 95: 1118-1129, 1985. |
Nahoum, “The Vacuum Formed Dental Contour Appliance,” N. Y. State Dent. J., 30(9):385-390 (Nov. 1964). |
Nash, “CEREC CAD/CAM Inlays: Aesthetics and Durability in a Single Appointment,” Dent. Today, 9(8):20, 22-23 (Oct. 1990). |
Nishiyama et al., “A New Construction of Tooth Repositioner by LTV Vinyl Silicone Rubber,” J. Nihon Univ. Sch. Dent., 19(2):93-102 (1977). |
Paul et al., “Digital Documentation of Individual Human Jaw and Tooth Forms for Applications in Orthodontics, Oral Surgery and Forensic Medicine” Proc. of the 24th Annual Conf. of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (IECON '98), Sep. 4, 1998, pp. 2415-2418. |
Pinkham, “Foolish Concept Propels Technology,” Dentist, 3 pages total, Jan./Feb. 1989. |
Pinkham, “Inventor's CAD/CAM May Transform Dentistry,” Dentist, 3 pages total, Sep. 1990. |
Ponitz, “Invisible Retainers,” Am. J. Orthod., 59(3):266-272 (Mar. 1971). |
PROCERA Research Projects, “PROCERA Research Projects 1993—Abstract Collection,” pp. 3-7 28 (1993). |
Proffit et al., Contemporary Orthodontics, (Second Ed.), Chapter 15, Mosby Inc., pp. 470-533 (Oct. 1993). |
Raintree Essix & ARS Materials, Inc., Raintree Essix, Technical Magazine Table of contents and Essix Appliances, <http://www.essix.com/magazine/defaulthtml> Aug. 13, 1997. |
Redmond et al., “Clinical Implications of Digital Orthodontics,” Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop., 117(2):240-242 (2000). |
Rekow et al. “CAD/CAM for Dental Restorations—Some of the Curious Challenges,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 38(4):314-318 (Apr. 1991). |
Rekow et al., “Comparison of Three Data Acquisition Techniques for 3-D Tooth Surface Mapping,” Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 13(1):344-345 1991. |
Rekow, “A Review of the Developments in Dental CAD/CAM Systems,” (contains references to Japanese efforts and content of the papers of particular interest to the clinician are indicated with a one line summary of their content in the bibliography), Curr. Opin. Dent., 2:25-33 (Jun. 1992). |
Rekow, “CAD/CAM in Dentistry: A Historical Perspective and View of the Future,” J. Can. Dent. Assoc., 58(4):283, 287-288 (Apr. 1992). |
Rekow, “Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing in Dentistry: A Review of the State of the Art,” J. Prosthet. Dent., 58(4):512-516 (Oct. 1987). |
Rekow, “Dental CAD-CAM Systems: What is the State of the Art?”, J. Amer. Dent. Assoc., 122:43-48 1991. |
Rekow, “Feasibility of an Automated System for Production of Dental Restorations, Ph.D. Thesis,” Univ. of Minnesota, 244 pages total, Nov. 1988. |
Richmond et al., “The Development of a 3D Cast Analysis System,” Br. J. Orthod., 13(1):53-54 (Jan. 1986). |
Richmond et al., “The Development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): Reliability and Validity,” Eur. J. Orthod., 14:125-139 (1992). |
Richmond, “Recording the Dental Cast in Three Dimensions,” Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop., 92(3):199-206 (Sep. 1987). |
Rudge, “Dental Arch Analysis: Arch Form, A Review of the Literature,” Eur. J. Orthod., 3(4):279-284 1981. |
Sakuda et al., “Integrated Information-Processing System in Clinical Orthodontics: An Approach with Use of a Computer Network System,” Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop., 101(3): 210-220 (Mar. 1992). |
Schellhas et al., “Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography in Maxillofacial Surgical Planning,” Arch. Otolamp!. Head Neck Surg., 114:438-442 (Apr. 1988). |
Schroeder et al., Eds. The Visual Toolkit, Prentice Hall PTR, New Jersey (1998) Chapters 6, 8 & 9, (pp. 153-210,309-354, and 355-428, respectively). |
Shilliday, (1971). Minimizing finishing problems with the mini-positioner, Am. J. Orthod. 59:596-599. |
Siemens, “CEREC—Computer-Reconstruction,” High Tech in der Zahnmedizin, 14 pages total (2004). |
Sinclair, “The Readers' Corner,” J. Clin. Orthod., 26(6):369-372 (Jun. 1992). |
Sirona Dental Systems GmbH, CEREC 3D, Manuel utiiisateur, Version 2.0X (in French), 2003, 114 pages total. |
Stoll et al., “Computer-aided Technologies in Dentistry,” (article summary in English, article in German), Dtsch Zahna'rztl Z 45, pp. 314-322 (1990). |
Sturman, “Interactive Keyframe Animation of 3-D Articulated Models,” Proceedings Graphics Interface '84, May-Jun. 1984, pp. 35-40. |
The Choice Is Clear: Red, White & Blue . . . The Simple, Affordable, No-Braces Treatment, Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab product information for doctors. http://ormco.com/aoa/appliancesservices/RWB/doctorhtml>, 5 pages (May 19, 2003). |
The Choice is Clear: Red, White & Blue . . . The Simple, Affordable, No-Braces Treatment, Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab product information for patients, <http://ormco.com/aoa/appliancesservices/RWB/patients.html>, 2 pages (May 19, 2003). |
The Choice Is Clear: Red, White & Blue . . . The Simple, Affordable, No-Braces Treatment, Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab product information, 6 pages (2003). |
The Red, White & Blue Way to Improve Your Smile! Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab product information for patients, 2 pages 1992. |
Truax L., “Truax Clasp-Less(TM) Appliance System,” Funct. Orthod., 9(5):22-4, 26-8 (Sep.-Oct. 1992). |
Tru-Tain Orthodontic & Dental Supplies, Product Brochure, Rochester, Minnesota 55902, 16 pages total (1996). |
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, “Automated Crown Replication Using Solid Photography SM,” Solid Photography Inc., Melville NY, Oct. 1977, 20 pages total. |
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, “Holodontography: An Introduction to Dental Laser Holography,” School of Aerospace Medicine Brooks AFB Tex, Mar. 1973, 37 pages total. |
U.S. Appl. No. 60/050,342, filed Jun. 20, 1997, 41 pages total. |
Van Der Linden et al., “Three-Dimensional Analysis of Dental Casts by Means of the Optocom,” J. Dent. Res., p. 1100 (Jul.-Aug. 1972). |
Van Der Linden, “A New Method to Determine Tooth Positions and Dental Arch Dimensions,” J. Dent. Res., 51(4):1104 (Jul.-Aug. 1972). |
Van Der Zel, “Ceramic-Fused-to-Metal Restorations with a New CAD/CAM System,” Quintessence Int., 24(11):769-778 (1993). |
Varady et al., “Reverse Engineering of Geometric Models—An Introduction,” Computer-Aided Design, 29(4):255-268,1997. |
Verstreken et al., “An Image-Guided Planning System for Endosseous Oral Implants,” IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, 17(5):842-852 (Oct. 1998). |
Warunek et al., Physical and Mechanical Properties of Elastomers in Orthodonic Positioners, Am J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop, vol. 95, No. 5, (May 1989) pp. 399-400. |
Warunek et.al., Clinical Use of Silicone Elastomer Applicances, JCO (1989) XXIII(10):694-700. |
Wells, Application of the Positioner Appliance in Orthodontic Treatment, Am. J. Orthodont. (1970) 58:351-366. |
Williams, “Dentistry and CAD/CAM: Another French Revolution,” J. Dent. Practice Admin., pp. 2-5 (Jan./Mar. 1987). |
Williams, “The Switzerland and Minnesota Developments in CAD/CAM,” J. Dent. Practice Admin., pp. 50-55 (Apr./Jun. 1987). |
Wishan, “New Advances in Personal Computer Applications for Cephalometric Analysis, Growth Prediction, Surgical Treatment Planning and Imaging Processing,” Symposium: Computerized Facial Imaging in Oral and Maxilofacial Surgery Presented on Sep. 13, 1990. |
WSCG'98—Conference Program, “The Sixth International Conference in Central Europe on Computer Graphics and Visualization '98,” Feb. 9-13, 1998, pp. 1-7, retrieved from the Internet on Nov. 5, 2004, URL<http://wscg.zcu.cz/wscg98/wscg98.h>. |
Xia et al., “Three-Dimensional Virtual-Reality Surgical Planning and Soft-Tissue Prediction for Orthognathic Surgery,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Technol. Biomed., 5(2):97-107 (Jun. 2001). |
Yamamoto et al., “Optical Measurement of Dental Cast Profile and Application to Analysis of Three-Dimensional Tooth Movement in Orthodontics,” Front. Med. Biol. Eng., 1(2):119-130 (1988). |
Yamamoto et al., “Three-Dimensional Measurement of Dental Cast Profiles and Its Applications to Orthodontics,” Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc., 12(5):2051-2053 (1990). |
Yamany et al., “A System for Human Jaw Modeling Using Intra-Oral Images,” Proc. of the 20th Annual Conf. of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Nov. 1, 1998, vol. 2, pp. 563-566. |
Yoshii, “Research on a New Orthodontic Appliance: The Dynamic Positioner (D.P.); I. The D.P. Concept and Implementation of Transparent Silicone Resin (Orthocon),” Nippon Dental Review, 452:61-74 (Jun. 1980). |
Yoshii, “Research on a New Orthodontic Appliance: The Dynamic Positioner (D.P.); II. The D.P. Manufacturing Procedure and Clinical Applications,” Nippon Dental Review, 454:107-130 (Aug. 1980). |
Yoshii, “Research on a New Orthodontic Appliance: The Dynamic Positioner (D.P.); Ill.—The General Concept of the D.P. Method and Its Therapeutic Effect, Part 2. Skeletal Reversed Occlusion Case Reports,” Nippon Dental Review, 458:112-129 (Dec. 1980). |
Yoshii, “Research on a New Orthodontic Appliance: The Dynamic Positioner (D.P.); Ill. The General Concept of the D.P. Method and Its Therapeutic Effect, Part 1, Dental and Functional Reversed Occlusion Case Reports,” Nippon Dental Review, 457:146-164 (Nov. 1980). |
You May Be a Candidate for This Invisible No-Braces Treatment, Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab product information for patients, 2 pages (2002). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160256248 A1 | Sep 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61601448 | Feb 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13773229 | Feb 2013 | US |
Child | 15155995 | US |