The present invention relates generally to the field of orthodontics, and more particularly to systems and methods of developing and tracking delivery and patient progression through an orthodontic treatment plan.
An objective of orthodontics is to move a patient's teeth to positions where function and/or aesthetics are optimized. Traditionally, appliances such as braces are applied to the patient's teeth by an orthodontist or dentist and the set of braces exerts continual force on the teeth and gradually urges them toward their intended positions. Over time and with a series of clinical visits and adjustments to the braces, the orthodontist adjusts the appliances to move the teeth toward their final destination.
More recently, alternatives to conventional orthodontic treatment with traditional affixed appliances (e.g., braces) have become available. For example, systems including a series of preformed aligners have become commercially available from Align Technology, Inc., Santa Clara, Calif., under the tradename Invisalign® System. The Invisalign® System includes designing and/or fabricating multiple, and sometimes all, of the aligners to be worn by the patient before the aligners are administered to the patient and used to reposition the teeth (e.g., at the outset of treatment). Often, designing and planning a customized treatment for a patient makes use of computer-based 3-dimensional planning/design tools, such as ClinCheck® from Align Technology, Inc. The design of the aligners can rely on computer modeling of a series of planned successive tooth arrangements, and the individual aligners are designed to be worn over the teeth and elastically reposition the teeth to each of the planned tooth arrangements.
While patient treatment and tooth movements can be planned prospectively, in some cases orthodontic treatment can deviate from the planned treatment or stages. Deviations can arise for numerous reasons, and can include biological variations, poor patient compliance, and/or factors related to biomechanical design. In the case of aligners, continued treatment with previously designed and/or fabricated aligners can be difficult or impossible where a patient's teeth deviate substantially from the planned treatment course. For example, subsequent aligners may no longer fit the patient's teeth once treatment progression has deviated from the planned course. Because detecting a deviation from planned treatment most typically relies on visual inspection of the patient's teeth or observation of appliances no longer fitting, treatment can sometimes progress significantly off track by the time a deviation is detected, thereby making any required corrective measures more difficult and/or substantial. Earlier and better off track determinations would, therefore, be beneficial in order to recalibrate the fit of the aligner device on the teeth. Accordingly, improved methods and techniques of detecting and correcting treatment that has deviated from planned or desired treatment course would be desirable, particularly methods allowing early detection of treatment deviation.
The present invention provides improved systems and methods for tracking a patient's progress according to a planned treatment, incorporating enhanced tracking techniques into treatment delivery and management, and, if necessary, revising or modifying the patient's treatment plan based on a determination that treatment has progressed off track. Information obtained according to the invention techniques can be used, for example, to more actively and/or effectively manage delivery of orthodontic treatment, increasing treatment efficacy and successful progression to the patient's teeth to the desired finished positions.
Thus, in one aspect, the present invention includes systems and methods of identifying deviations from an orthodontic treatment plan. A method can include, for example, receiving a digital representation of an actual arrangement of a patient's teeth after an orthodontic treatment plan has begun for the patient and prior to completion of the orthodontic treatment plan; and comparing the actual arrangement to a pre-determined planned arrangement to determine if the actual arrangement substantially deviates from the planned arrangement, and calculating one or more positional differences between the actual and planned arrangements of at least some of the corresponding teeth.
The present invention further includes systems and methods of managing delivery and patient progression through an orthodontic treatment plan. Such a method can include, for example, providing an initial treatment plan for a patient, providing a set of orthodontic appliances, tracking progression of the patient's teeth along the treatment path, comparing the actual arrangement with a planned arrangement to determine if the actual arrangement of the teeth matches a planned tooth arrangement, and generating a revised treatment plan where it is determined that the actual tooth arrangement deviates from the planned tooth arrangement. In another example, a method can include receiving a digital representation of an actual arrangement of a patient's teeth after an orthodontic treatment plan has begun for the patient and prior to completion of the orthodontic treatment plan; comparing the actual arrangement to a digital model of a planned arrangement, and generating a revised treatment plan.
A system can include a computer coupled to a server, the computer comprising a processor and a computer readable medium comprising instructions which, if executed, cause the computer to: receive a digital representation of an actual arrangement of a patient's teeth after the orthodontic treatment plan has begun for the patient and prior to completion of the orthodontic treatment plan; compare the actual arrangement to a pre-determined planned arrangement; and calculate one or more positional differences between the actual and planned arrangements of at least some of the corresponding teeth; and generate a revised treatment plan.
A system according to another embodiment of the present invention can include a computer coupled to a server, the computer comprising a processor and a computer readable medium comprising instructions which, if executed, cause the computer to generate an initial treatment plan for a patient including enhanced tracking of the patient's treatment progress, provide a set of orthodontic appliances corresponding to a treatment phase, track progression of the patient's teeth along a treatment path, compare the actual arrangement with a planned arrangement, and generate a revised treatment plan where it is determined that the actual tooth arrangement substantially deviates from the planned tooth arrangement.
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. Other aspects, objects and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the drawings and detailed description that follows.
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.
The novel features of the invention are set forth with particularity in the appended claims. A better understanding of the features and advantages of the present invention will be obtained by reference to the following detailed description that sets forth illustrative embodiments, in which the principles of the invention are utilized, and the accompanying drawings of which:
The invention described herein provides improved systems and methods for tracking a patient's progress according to a planned treatment, incorporating enhanced tracking techniques into treatment delivery and management, and, if necessary, revising or modifying the patient's treatment plan based on a determination that treatment has progressed off track. Systems and methods of treatment progress tracking and revised planning can be included in a variety of orthodontic treatment regimens. For example, the progress tracking and revised planning features can be optionally included and incorporated into other aspects of treatment according to the Invisalign® System. Treatment can be pre-planned for administering to a patient in a series of one or more phases, with each phase including a set of appliances that are worn successively by the patient to reposition the teeth through planned arrangements and eventually toward a selected final arrangement. Progress tracking, according to the present invention, is incorporated into the pre-planned treatment for monitoring and management, and to provide enhanced detection and feedback as to whether treatment is progressing on track.
Tracking can occur at any point during treatment but will typically be scheduled to correspond with a patient completing a pre-planned phase of treatment (e.g., wearing each appliance in a designated set). For example, once initial staging of a patients teeth is completed (e.g., model initial, intermediate, and final teeth arrangements) and a treatment plan has been devised, a dental practitioner can be sent a first set of one or more appliances to be administered to the patient in the first phase of treatment. After the last appliance in the first set is administered to the patient, an image of the patient's teeth in their positions following administration of the first set of appliances can be taken (e.g., scan, impression, etc.). From the image of the patient's teeth in their current position, an assessment is made as to how the treatment is tracking relative to the original treatment projections. If there is a substantial deviation from the planned treatment path, then corrective action can be taken, for example, in order to achieve the original designed final position. Treatment then progresses to the next phase, where treatment is either finalized if the intended final positions are reached, or a second set of appliances can be sent to the practitioner for administration to the patient. The second set of appliances can be based on the initial treatment plan if treatment is progressing on track, or can be based on a revised or modified treatment plan where a determination is made that treatment is off track.
Methods and techniques for tracking and preserving the original final position in the treatment is generally referred to herein as “teeth matching” or “bite matching”. For example, bite matching techniques described herein can include matching teeth from the original image of the teeth or impression, to surface(s) of a new model of the teeth taken after treatment has begun. An off-track determination can be followed by “re-setting” to the actual position of the teeth as defined by data represented in the progress scan, the original data of the teeth (i.e., segmented models from initial treatment plan), thereby allowing preservation of the initially selected final target position of the teeth. In other words, the original data set which contains with it, an established target arrangement, can be reused, by repositioning the teeth arrangement according to the positions of the (same) teeth captured in the progress scan. In so doing, a new planned path to go from the current to the target can be recreated without having to change the original target configuration. This method is enabled by using bite matching techniques to allow the current aligner geometry to be recalibrated and reshaped according to the actual position of the teeth in the progress scan. Using such bite matching techniques provides significant advantages in terms of efficiency as there is no need to re-segment and process the new scan of the teeth, and in terms of efficacy since the initial final arrangement is preserved, even if the patient progresses off track.
Incorporating the inventive techniques and tracking methods described herein in managing delivery/modification would provide various advantages, including earlier detection of treatment deviations, allowing earlier remedial measures to be taken, if necessary, to avoid undesirable treatment outcomes and preservation of initial treatment goals, thereby ultimately allowing for more effective treatment and better clinical outcomes. Furthermore, treatment efficiency and efficacy can be increased by better avoidance of inefficient/undesirable treatment “detours”. Additionally, improved monitoring and tracking, as described, is more objective and reliable, and less qualitative in nature than the common practice of visually identifying off-track progress. This reduces the inter-clinician variability and reduces the dependency of accurate detection on clinician experience. As such, currently described inventive methods and techniques can inspire more confidence in both patients and practitioners, including practitioners that may be less experienced with a given treatment method and/or less confident in their abilities to clinically detect off-track progression, or even more experienced practitioners who desire more detailed monitoring, for example, in cases involving more difficult or less predictable movements.
Referring now to
As set forth in the prior applications, each appliance may be configured so that its tooth-receiving cavity has a geometry corresponding to an intermediate or final tooth arrangement intended for the appliance. The patient's teeth are progressively repositioned from their initial tooth arrangement to a final tooth arrangement by placing a series of incremental position adjustment appliances over the patient's teeth. The adjustment appliances can be generated all at the same stage or in sets or batches, e.g., at the beginning of a stage of the treatment, and the patient wears each appliance until the pressure of each appliance on the teeth can no longer be felt or has resulted in the maximum allowable tooth movement for that given stage. A plurality of different appliances (e.g., set) can be designed and even fabricated prior to the patient wearing any appliance of the plurality. At that point, the patient replaces the current appliance with the next appliance in the series until no more appliances remain. The appliances are generally not affixed to the teeth and the patient may place and replace the appliances at any time during the procedure. The final appliance or several appliances in the series may have a geometry or geometries selected to overcorrect the tooth arrangement, i.e., have a geometry which would (if fully achieved) move individual teeth beyond the tooth arrangement which has been selected as the “final.” Such over-correction may be desirable in order to offset potential relapse after the repositioning method has been terminated, i.e., to permit movement of individual teeth back toward their pre-corrected positions. Over-correction may also be beneficial to speed the rate of correction, i.e., by having an appliance with a geometry that is positioned beyond a desired intermediate or final position, the individual teeth will be shifted toward the position at a greater rate. In such cases, the use of an appliance can be terminated before the teeth reach the positions defined by the appliance.
Referring to
Systems of the present invention can include network based systems, including a data network and a server terminal operatively coupled to the network. One or more client terminals can be included and operatively coupled to the network. Systems can optionally include more stand-alone or non-network based systems, including computers and software packages designed to at least partially operate independent of a data network and in which various steps of the currently described methods can be accomplished in an automated fashion at a remote location (e.g., practitioner's office).
As an initial step, a mold or a scan of patient's teeth or mouth tissue is acquired (Step 302). This generally involves taking casts of the patient's teeth and gums, and may in addition or alternately involve taking wax bites, direct contact scanning, x-ray imaging, tomographic imaging, sonographic imaging, and other techniques for obtaining information about the position and structure of the teeth, jaws, gums and other orthodontically relevant tissue. From the data so obtained, a digital data set is derived that represents an initial (e.g., pretreatment) arrangement of the patient's teeth and other tissues.
The initial digital data set, which may include both raw data from scanning operations and data representing surface models derived from the raw data, is processed to segment the tissue constituents from each other (Step 304), including defining discrete dental objects. For example, data structures that digitally represent individual tooth crowns can be produced. In some embodiments, digital models of entire teeth are produced, including measured or extrapolated hidden surfaces and root structures.
Desired final position of the teeth, or tooth positions that are desired and/or intended end result of orthodontic treatment, can be received, e.g., from a clinician in the form of a descriptive prescription, can be calculated using basic orthodontic prescriptions, or can be extrapolated computationally from a clinical prescription (Step 306). With a specification of the desired final positions of the teeth and a digital representation of the teeth themselves, the final position and surface geometry of each tooth can be specified (Step 308) to form a complete model of the teeth at the desired end of treatment. The result of this step is a set of digital data structures that represents a desired and/or orthodontically correct repositioning of the modeled teeth relative to presumed-stable tissue. The teeth and surrounding tissue are both represented as digital data.
Having both a beginning position and a final target position for each tooth, the process next defines a treatment path or tooth path for the motion of each tooth (Step 310). This includes defining a plurality of planned successive tooth arrangements for moving teeth along a treatment path from an initial arrangement to a selected final arrangement. In one embodiment, the tooth paths are optimized in the aggregate so that the teeth are moved in the most efficient and clinically acceptable fashion to bring the teeth from their initial positions to their desired final positions.
At various stages of the process, the process can include interaction with a clinician responsible for the treatment of the patient (Step 312). Clinician interaction can be implemented using a client process programmed to receive tooth positions and models, as well as path information from a server computer or process in which other steps of process 300 are implemented. The client process is advantageously programmed to allow the clinician to display an animation of the positions and paths and to allow the clinician to reset the final positions of one or more of the teeth and to specify constraints to be applied to the segmented paths.
The tooth paths and associated tooth position data are used to calculate clinically acceptable appliance configurations (or successive changes in appliance configuration) that will move the teeth on the defined treatment path in the steps specified (Step 314). Each appliance configuration corresponds to a planned successive arrangement of the teeth, and represents a step along the treatment path for the patient. The steps are defined and calculated so that each discrete position can follow by straight-line tooth movement or simple rotation from the tooth positions achieved by the preceding discrete step and so that the amount of repositioning required at each step involves an orthodontically optimal amount of force on the patient's dentition. As with other steps, this calculation step can include interactions with the clinician (Step 312).
Having calculated appliance definitions, the process 300 can proceed to the manufacturing step (Step 316) in which appliances defined by the process are manufactured, or electronic or printed information is produced that can be used by a manual or automated process to define appliance configurations or changes to appliance configurations. Appliances according to the treatment plan can be produced in entirety, such that each of the appliances are manufactured (e.g., prior to treatment), or can be manufactured in sets or batches. For example, in some cases in might be appropriate to manufacture an initial set of appliances at the outset of treatment with the intention of manufacturing additional sets of appliances (e.g., second, third, fourth, etc.) after treatment has begun (e.g., as discussed further herein). For example, a first set of appliances can be manufactured and administered to a patient. Following administration, it may be desirable to track the progression of the patient's teeth along the treatment path before manufacturing and/or administering subsequent set(s) of appliances.
Generating and/or analyzing digital treatment plans, as discussed herein, can include, for example, use of 3-dimensional orthodontic treatment planning tools such as ClinCheck from Align Technology, Inc. or other software available from eModels and OrthoCAD, among others. These technologies allow the clinician to use the actual patient's dentition as a starting point for customizing the treatment plan. The ClinCheck technology uses a patient-specific digital model to plot a treatment plan, and then uses a processed (e.g., segmented) scan of the achieved treatment outcome to assess the degree of success of the outcome as compared to the original digital treatment plan as, as discussed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,156,661 and 7,077,647 (see also, below).
In some cases, patients do not progress through treatment as expected and/or planned. For example, in some instances a patient's progression along a treatment path can become “off-track” or will deviate from an initial treatment plan, whereby an actual tooth arrangement achieved by the patient will differ from the expected or planned tooth arrangement, such as a planned tooth arrangement corresponding to the shape of a particular appliance. A determination that the progression of a patient's teeth is deviating or not tracking with the original treatment plan can be accomplished in a variety of ways. As set forth above, off-track deviations can be detected by visual and/or clinical inspection of the patient's teeth. For example, a substantial off track deviation from the expected or planned treatment may become apparent when the patient tries to wear a next appliance in a series. If the actual tooth arrangement substantially differs from the planned arrangement of the teeth, the next appliance will typically not be able to seat properly over the patient's teeth. Thus, an off-track deviation may become substantially visually apparent to a treating professional, or even to the patient, upon visual or clinical inspection of the teeth.
Detecting deviations from a planned treatment, however, can be difficult, particularly for patients as well as certain dental practitioners, such as those with more limited experience in orthodontics, certain general dentist, technicians and the like. Additionally, deviations that have progressed to the point that they are visually detectable clinically are often substantially off track with respect to the planned treatment, and earlier means of off-track detection is often desired. Thus, detecting deviations from a treatment plan can also be accomplished by comparing digital models of the patients teeth, and can often detect deviations from a treatment plan before the deviation becomes substantially apparent by visual or clinical inspection.
An exemplary computer based teeth matching process according to an embodiment of the present invention is described with reference to
In some instances, detecting a deviation from a treatment plan via comparison between digital models of the patients teeth can include comparing a current scan or image, which has not been segmented, of the patients teeth in a position after treatment has begun to a previously segmented data set of the patients teeth at a current, past or future stage. Use of an unsegmented, rather than segmented, digital representation of the current teeth positions may be desirable, for example, in order to avoid resource and/or labor intensive processing steps to transform the current unsegmented digital teeth model to a segmented digital teeth model. In addition, lower resolution or quality scans or images can save cost and time if the necessary reference points can be identified on the unsegmented current scan or image.
In step 604, a Previously Segmented Teeth Model is selected, and is input into a system of the present invention for analysis and comparison with the Current Teeth Image. The Previously Segmented Teeth Model selected can include an Initially Segmented Teeth Model or a digital model of the patient's teeth in their initial, pre-treatment positions, the initial final position according to the initial or previous treatment plan (e.g., Prescribed Tooth Arrangement), or a planned successive tooth arrangement therebetween.
In step 606, the Previously Segmented Teeth Model and the Current Teeth Image are compared. This step includes a sort of “rough match” of the segmented model and the Current Teeth Image to identify corresponding features of the two models that may be compared (Step 608). For example, an initial matching algorithm can be executed which matches unique starting identifiers (FACCs) of each tooth in the Previously Segmented Teeth Model to the respective unique current identifiers (FACCs) of each tooth in the Current Teeth Image. The images can be overlaid on each other and the relative location of each tooth identified by its unique identifier (or FACC) to determine if there are any mismatches in step 608.
If any mismatches are found, an initial match has not occurred and the mismatches are displayed in the form of an informational dialog that provides details of the mismatches, such as teeth numbering irregularities or missing FACCs. A mismatch can occur, for example, if there are any teeth numbering irregularities, such as the total number of teeth in each model is not the same, or at least one tooth is missing a FACC. Mismatches may result, for example, where substantial dental work or reconstruction (e.g., tooth extraction, tooth reconstruction, filling, etc.) has occurred following the initial treatment plan or generation of Previously Segmented Teeth Model.
In Step 610, initial mismatch errors as identified above can be manually accounted for in the process. For example, a technician can manually adjust or reposition each tooth with a mismatch using the Previously Segmented Teeth Model or adjusts the information relating to each tooth with a mismatch (e.g., accounting for an extracted tooth).
If no mismatches are generated in step 608, or where mismatches have been accounted for according to 610, then an initial match occurs and the process moves to step 612. The initial match confirms that the technician is using the correct Previously Segmented Teeth Model and the Current Teeth Image, which provides a good starting point for executing a surface matching algorithm.
In step 612, more detailed matching and comparison between Previously Segmented Teeth Model and the Current Teeth Image occurs, which includes execution a surface matching algorithm. The surface matching algorithm can take a number of samples of each tooth in the Previously Segmented Teeth Model and finds the closest corresponding sampling point on the Current Teeth Image. A grid is created on each tooth and the number of samples is randomly selected and then the grid is overlaid on the Current Teeth Image.
In step 614, any resulting errors from the surface matching algorithm are compared to predetermined tolerances to determine if the resulting errors are less than the predetermined tolerance. Error tolerances can account for potential differences in the models being compared that might impair meaningful comparison, such as errors due to typical variance between different scans or impressions, surface differences or fluctuations, and the like. If the resulting errors are greater than the pre-determined tolerance, then in step 616, error statistics for the surface matching algorithm are typically output to a display device and can be further redirected to a technician for manual input or correction as in step 610.
If the resulting errors are less than the pre-determined tolerance, in step 618, then matching and comparison of the Previously Segmented Teeth Model and the Current Teeth Image proceeds for a determination whether the actual arrangement of the patient's teeth deviates from the planned arrangement. In particular, a determination can be made as to whether positional differences exist, and to what degree, between the teeth in their current positions compared to the expected or planned positions. Positional differences may indicate whether the patient's teeth are progressing according to the treatment plan or if the patient's teeth are substantially off track. Various clinical and/or positional parameters can be examined and compared for a determination as to whether a patient's teeth are substantially on track or are deviating from an expected arrangement according to the treatment plan. For example, positional parameters examined can include tooth rotation, extrusion, intrusion, angulation, inclination, translation, and the like. Threshold values for differences in one or more positional parameters can be selected as being indicative of a significant or substantial difference in tooth position. Exemplary threshold values for various positional parameters, according to one embodiment of the invention are listed in Table 1 below. Detecting positional differences above the selected threshold value(s) indicates that the actual arrangement of the patients teeth substantially deviates from the planned arrangement to which the comparison is made.
If the patient's teeth are determined to be on track by comparison of the teeth in their current positions with teeth in their expected or planned positions, then treatment can progress according to the existing or original treatment plan (Step 620). For example, a patient determined to be progressing on track can be administered one or more subsequent appliances according to the treatment plan, such as the next set of appliances. Treatment can progress to the final stages and/or can reach a point in the treatment plan where bite matching is repeated for a determination of whether the patient's teeth are progressing as planned or if the teeth are off track. If the patient's teeth are determined off track and deviating from the planned arrangement, then treatment according to the original treatment plan will be suspended. Typically, a modified or revised treatment plan will be generated where a patient's teeth are determined as being substantially off track (Step 622). Regardless of whether the patient's teeth are determined to be off track or progressing according to the treatment plan, the process can generate a report or analysis of the results, and/or visualize the comparison, including any detected discrepancy (Step 624). Any such product can be transmitted, for example, to a technician or treating professional, to the patient, or elsewhere.
If the initial matching algorithm determines that one or more teeth are mismatched, the initial matching algorithm cannot complete the initial matching satisfactorily because of teeth numbering irregularities or missing FACCs. In this instance, the initial matching algorithm will generate an informational dialog giving details of the mismatches allowing the technician to correct them and execute the initial matching algorithm again. Also shown in
See also, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 8,075,306, entitled “System and Method for Detecting Deviations During the Course of an Orthodontic Treatment to Gradually Reposition Teeth,” issued Dec. 13, 2011, the full disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference, for further discussion of comparing an unsegmented representation of an actual arrangement of a patients teeth after treatment has begun, to a previously segmented model of the patient's teeth.
While the timing of the progress tracking steps described herein can be selected by the practitioner, typically at least general timing for conducting progress tracking measures of the present invention will be incorporated into the treatment plan and, therefore, will be pre-planned or planned at about the beginning of treatment or early on in the course of the patient's treatment (e.g., prior to the patient wearing a given set of appliances so as to reposition the teeth). Thus, in one embodiment of the invention, a treatment plan will include a prescribed timing for the planned tracking steps. The prescribed timing can include a specifically recommended date or may include a general increment of time (e.g., at treatment week 9, 10, 11, etc.), or can be based on the timing of other events of the treatment plan (e.g., after a patient wears a set of appliances).
Timing of progress tracking steps can be selected to occur based on a somewhat standardized treatment protocol or can be more particularly customized to an individual patient. More standardized protocols can take into account certain population statistics, generalized clinical expectations, and/or physiological parameters that can be used to generally predict rate of movement of a patient's teeth and the minimum length of treatment time necessary for the patient's teeth to progress off track if such progression is occurring. Clinical parameters can include, for example, root structure, including length, shape, and positioning, as well as certain jaw characteristics such as jaw bone density, patient age, gender, ethnicity, medications/health history profile, dental history including prior treatment with orthodontics, type of orthodontic treatment plan (extraction vs. non-extraction), and the like. Assuming a 2-week wear interval for each appliance, with a maximum tooth velocity of 0.25 mm/tooth per aligner, typically about 16 to 20 weeks of repositioning treatment (8 to 10 appliances) is required before movement of the teeth is substantial enough to detect a noncompliant or off track movement of the teeth, if such off track movement is occurring, though more drastic movements can produce off track movement after only a few weeks.
As set forth above, timing of tracking measures can be selected based on the particular movement(s) prescribed and/or characteristics of the patient being treated and, therefore, are said to be customized to the particular patient. For example, certain desired tooth movements in a treatment plan may be deemed either more unpredictable or at increased risk of moving off track and may require specifically timed tracking or monitoring. For example, for certain movements including, e.g., extrusions or rotations of round teeth (e.g., canines), more specific or frequent tracking may be desired. Additionally, certain physiological or clinical characteristics of the patient may be identified as indicating that particularly timed and/or frequency of tracking might be desired. Whether tracking is selected based on standardized protocols or more customized to the individual patient, tracking may or may not be selected to uniformly timed during the course of treatment. For example, a lower frequency of tracking measures may be desired or needed during certain portions or phases of treatment than others (e.g., space closure). Regardless of whether tracking timing is customized or more standardized, the selected timing will typically provide the additional advantage of efficiently planning tracking in the treatment plan to minimize unnecessary use of practitioner time and other resources.
Once a determination is made that the patient's actual arrangement of teeth deviates from a planned arrangement and that the patient's teeth are not progressing as expected/planned, a change or correction in the course of treatment can be selected, for example, by generating a revised or modified treatment plan. Referring to
In particular, current tooth positions of the patient can be obtained from the patient any one or more phases and compared to segmented models of the patient's teeth according to an earlier or original treatment plan. Where teeth are determined to be deviating from the planned treatment plan or progressing “off track”, as illustrated by broken lines, modification or revision of treatment plan can occur. In one embodiment, a revised treatment plan can include restaging the patient's treatment from the determined actual position to the originally determined final position (
Alternatively, a revised treatment plan can include a more direct “mid-course correction”, in which the revised treatment plan includes a more direct path back toward the a planned arrangement of the initial treatment plan, as illustrated in
The user interface input devices 718 are not limited to any particular device, and can typically include, for example, a keyboard, pointing device, mouse, scanner, interactive displays, etc. Similarly, various user interface output devices can be employed in a system of the invention, and can include, for example, one or more of a printer, display (e.g., visual, non-visual) system/subsystem, controller, projection device, audio output, and the like.
Storage subsystem 706 maintains the basic required programming, including computer readable media having instructions (e.g., operating instructions, etc.), and data constructs. The program modules discussed herein are typically stored in storage subsystem 706. Storage subsystem 706 typically comprises memory subsystem 708 and file storage subsystem 714. Memory subsystem 708 typically includes a number of memories (e.g., RAM 710, ROM 712, etc.) including computer readable memory for storage of fixed instructions, instructions and data during program execution, basic input/output system, etc. File storage subsystem 714 provides persistent (non-volatile) storage for program and data files, and can include one or more removable or fixed drives or media, hard disk, floppy disk, CD-ROM, DVD, optical drives, and the like. One or more of the storage systems, drives, etc may be located at a remote location, such coupled via a server on a network or via the Internet's World Wide Web. In this context, the term “bus subsystem” is used generically so as to include any mechanism for letting the various components and subsystems communicate with each other as intended and can include a variety of suitable components/systems that would be known or recognized as suitable for use therein. It will be recognized that various components of the system can be, but need not necessarily be at the same physical location, but could be connected via various local-area or wide-area network media, transmission systems, etc.
Scanner 720 includes any means for obtaining an image of a patient's teeth (e.g., from casts 721), some of which have been described herein above, which can be obtained either from the patient or from treating professional, such as an orthodontist, and includes means of providing the image data/information to data processing system 700 for further processing. In some embodiments, scanner 720 may be located at a location remote with respect to other components of the system and can communicate image data and/or information to data processing system 700, for example, via a network interface 724. Fabrication system 722 fabricates dental appliances 723 based on a treatment plan, including data set information received from data processing system 700. Fabrication machine 722 can, for example, be located at a remote location and receive data set information from data processing system 700 via network interface 724.
It is understood that the examples and embodiments described herein are for illustrative purposes and that various modifications or changes in light thereof will be suggested to persons skilled in the art and are to be included within the spirit and purview of this application and the scope of the appended claims. Numerous different combinations are possible, and such combinations are considered to be part of the present invention.
While preferred embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described herein, it will be obvious to those skilled in the art that such embodiments are provided by way of example only. Numerous variations, changes, and substitutions will now occur to those skilled in the art without departing from the invention. It should be understood that various alternatives to the embodiments of the invention described herein may be employed in practicing the invention. It is intended that the following claims define the scope of the invention and that methods and structures within the scope of these claims and their equivalents be covered thereby.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/030,754, filed Jul. 9, 2018, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/665,926, filed Mar. 23, 2015, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,052,174, issued Aug. 21, 2018, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/341,645, filed Jul. 25, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,017,072, issued Apr. 28, 2015, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/034,373, filed Sep. 23, 2013, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,899,978, issued Dec. 2, 2014, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/760,705, filed Jun. 8, 2007, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,562,338, issued Oct. 22, 2013, the entire contents of each of which are incorporated herein by reference. This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/760,689, filed Jun. 8, 2007; U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/760,701, filed Jun. 8, 2007; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/760,612, filed Jun. 8, 2007, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,075,306, issued Dec. 13, 2011; the contents of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2467432 | Kesling | Apr 1949 | A |
3407500 | Kesling | Oct 1968 | A |
3600808 | Reeve et al. | Aug 1971 | A |
3660900 | Andrews et al. | May 1972 | A |
3683502 | Wallshein et al. | Aug 1972 | A |
3738005 | Cohen et al. | 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 et al. | 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 et al. | Oct 1984 | A |
4500294 | Lewis et al. | Feb 1985 | A |
4504225 | Yoshii | Mar 1985 | A |
4505673 | Yoshii et al. | Mar 1985 | A |
4526540 | Dellinger et al. | Jul 1985 | A |
4575330 | Hull et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4575805 | Moermann et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4591341 | Andrews et al. | May 1986 | A |
4609349 | Cain et al. | 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 et al. | May 1987 | A |
4676747 | Kesling et al. | 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 et al. | Dec 1988 | A |
4798534 | Breads et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
4836778 | Baumrind et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4837732 | Brandestini et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4850864 | Diamond et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4850865 | Napolitano et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4856991 | Breads et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4877398 | Kesling et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4880380 | Martz et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
4889238 | Batchelor et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4890608 | Steer et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4935635 | O'Harra et al. | 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 | Adell et al. | Jan 1991 | A |
5011405 | Lemchen | Apr 1991 | A |
5017133 | Miura et al. | 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 et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5121333 | Riley et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5125832 | Kesling | Jun 1992 | A |
5128870 | Erdman et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5130064 | Smalley et al. | 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 et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5184306 | Erdman et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5186623 | Breads et al. | Feb 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 et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5342202 | Deshayes et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5368478 | Andreiko et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5382164 | Stern et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5395238 | Andreiko et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5431562 | Andreiko et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5440326 | Quinn et al. | 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 |
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 et al. | 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, Sr. et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5621648 | Crump et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5645420 | Bergersen et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5645421 | Slootsky et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5655653 | Chester et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5683243 | Andreiko et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5692894 | Schwartz et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5725376 | Poirier et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5725378 | Wang et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5733126 | Andersson et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5740267 | Echerer et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742700 | Yoon et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5752832 | Vardimon et al. | May 1998 | A |
5799100 | Clarke et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5800174 | Andersson et al. | 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 et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5880962 | Andersson et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5934288 | Avila et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5957686 | Anthony et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5964587 | Sato et al. | 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 et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6049743 | Baba et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6062861 | Andersson | May 2000 | A |
6067523 | Bair et al. | May 2000 | A |
6068482 | Snow et al. | May 2000 | A |
6099314 | Kopelman et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6123544 | Cleary | Sep 2000 | A |
6152731 | Jordan 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 et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6244861 | Andreiko et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6309215 | Phan et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6315553 | Sachdeva | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6322359 | Jordan et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6350120 | Sachdeva et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6371761 | Cheang et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6382975 | Poirier et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6398548 | Muhammad et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6402707 | Ernst et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6406292 | Chishti et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6450807 | Chishti et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6482298 | Bhatnagar et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6524101 | Phan | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6554611 | Shishti 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 |
6722880 | Chishti et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6964564 | Phan | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7074038 | Miller | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7077647 | Choi | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7156661 | Choi et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7357636 | Hedge | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7474307 | Chishti et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7970628 | Kuo et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
8075306 | Kitching et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8562338 | Kitching et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8591225 | Wu et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8636510 | Kitching et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8899978 | Kitching et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
9017072 | Kitching et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9060829 | Sterental et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9168113 | Wu et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9364297 | Kitching et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
10052174 | Kitching et al. | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10342638 | Kitching et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
10368960 | Wu et al. | Aug 2019 | B2 |
10517696 | Kitching et al. | Dec 2019 | B2 |
20010002310 | Chishti et al. | May 2001 | A1 |
20010041320 | Phan | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020006597 | Andreiko et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020010568 | Rubbert et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020064746 | Muhammad et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020072027 | Chishti | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020187451 | Phan | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030003416 | Chishti | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009252 | Pavlovskaia et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030049584 | Chishti et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030139834 | Nikolskiy et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030143509 | Kopelman et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030190575 | Hilliard | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030224311 | Cronauer et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040072120 | Lauren | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040128010 | Pavlovskaia et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040197727 | Sachdeva et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040202983 | Tricca et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050019721 | Chishti | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050038669 | Sachdeva et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050048432 | Choi | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050055118 | Nikolskiy et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050064360 | Wen | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050079468 | Chishti | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050089822 | Geng et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050192835 | Kuo et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050241646 | Sotos et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050271996 | Sporbert et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060004609 | Kenneth et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060073437 | Kuo | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060079981 | Rubbert | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060121408 | Hedge et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060127836 | Wen | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060147872 | Andreiko | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060194163 | Tricca et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060199142 | Liu et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060263739 | Sporbert | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060286501 | Chishti et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070003900 | Miller | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070072144 | Imgrund | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070092850 | Kaza | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070099147 | Sachdeva | May 2007 | A1 |
20070141527 | Kuo | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070184398 | Cronauer | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070226005 | Smith et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070238065 | Sherwood | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080050692 | Hilliard | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080183500 | Banigan | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080305451 | Kitching | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080305452 | Sterental | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080305453 | Kitching | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080306724 | Kitching et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20120225401 | Kitching | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20140023980 | Kitching | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140087324 | Wu | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140193765 | Kitching et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140335466 | Kitching et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20150254410 | Sterental et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160074138 | Kitching et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20190314116 | Kitching et al. | Oct 2019 | 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 | Jan 2000 | EP |
0774933 | Dec 2000 | EP |
0731673 | May 2001 | EP |
463897 | Jan 1980 | ES |
2369828 | Jun 1978 | FR |
2652256 | Mar 1991 | FR |
1550777 | Aug 1979 | GB |
S5358191 | May 1978 | JP |
H0428359 | Jan 1992 | JP |
08508174 | Sep 1996 | JP |
H08508174 | 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 |
0147405 | Jul 2001 | WO |
WO-0147405 | Jul 2001 | WO |
WO-2006065955 | Jun 2006 | WO |
WO-2006118771 | Nov 2006 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 16/852,251, filed Apr. 17, 2020. |
AADR. American Association for Dental Research, Summary of Activities, Mar. 20-23, 1980, Los Angeles, 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, “3D Mapping of Maxillo-Facial Prosthesis,” AADR Abstract #607, 2 pages total, (1980). |
Altschuler et al., “Analysis of 3-D Data for Comparative 3-D Serial Growth Pattern Studies of Oral-Facial Structures,” IADR 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 Applications for Automated Industrial Inspection and Assembly, vol. 182, p. 187-191 (1979). |
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, Chapters, 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, “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 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, “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 Progress Report,” 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, “Computerized Diagnostic Setups and Simulations,” Angle Orthod., 40(1):28-36 (Jan. 1970). |
Biggerstaff et al., “Computerized Analysis of Occlusion in the Postcanine Dentition,” Am. J. Orthod., 61(3): 245-254 (Mar. 1972). |
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 Invisalign 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 et al., Precision Adjustment of the Transpalatal Lingual Arch: Computer Arch Form IN Predetermination, Am, Journal of Orthodontics, vol. 79, No. 2 (Feb. 1981), pp. 115-133. |
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). |
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 AG, 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 JD 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 Imaging in Dentistry,” Curr. Opin. Dent., 1:150-154 (1991). |
Duret et al., “CAD-CAM in Dentistry,” J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 117:715-720 (Nov. 1988). |
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. |
European search report with written opinion dated Mar. 7, 2017 for EP16197945.5. |
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 al., “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/Strasser98.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: JW Computerized Facial Imaging in Oral and Maxillofacial 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), Informationen, 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, Coordinating the Predetermined Pattern and Tooth Positioner with Conventional Treatment, KN Am. J. Orthod. Oral Surg. (1946) 32:285-293. |
Kesling et al., The Philosophy of the Tooth Positioning Appliance, American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral surgery. 1945; 31:297-304. |
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, ri 18(3):33-41 (Jul. 1984). KM 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 KR 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. Clin. 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, “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 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, “Feasibility of an Automated System for Production of Dental Restorations, Ph.D. Thesis,” Univ. of Minnesota, 244 pages total, Nov. 1988. |
Richmond, et al. A 2-Center Comparison of Orthodontist's Perceptions of Orthodontic Treatment Difficulty. Jan. 2001, Angle Orthodontist, vol. 71, No. 5, pp. 404-410. |
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. Otolaryngol 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, 6 pages (2003). |
The Choice is Clear: Red, White & Blue . . . The Simple, Affordable, No-Braces Treatment, Allesee HI 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 HJ Orthodontic Appliances-Pro Lab product information for patients, (http://ormco.com/aoa/appliancesservices/RWB/patients.html), 2 pages (May 19, 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, “A New Method to Determine Tooth Positions and Dental Arch Dimensions,” J. Dent. Res., 51(4):1104 (Jul.-Aug. 1972). |
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 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. 388-400. |
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. |
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, 1999. |
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.); III. 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). |
Yoshii, “Research on a New Orthodontic Appliance: The Dynamic Positioner (D.P.); III.—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). |
You May be a Candidate for This Invisible No-Braces Treatment, Allesee Orthodontic Appliances—Pro Lab product information for patients, 2 pages (2002). |
Thorlabs, Pellin broca prisms, 1 page, retrieved from the internet (www.thorlabs.com), Nov. 30, 2012. |
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 17/079,872, filed Oct. 26, 2020. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200093569 A1 | Mar 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 16030754 | Jul 2018 | US |
Child | 16697077 | US | |
Parent | 14665926 | Mar 2015 | US |
Child | 16030754 | US | |
Parent | 14341645 | Jul 2014 | US |
Child | 14665926 | US | |
Parent | 14034373 | Sep 2013 | US |
Child | 14341645 | US | |
Parent | 11760705 | Jun 2007 | US |
Child | 14034373 | US |