Read
Paper 5 | Read Comments | Add Comments
Comments
for Paper 5
Excellent paper guys. Can't wait to hear more from you about it.
tom tadysak <tady0005@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, November 07, 2002 at 07:21:28 (CST)
The CADCAM machines are certainly nifty devices, but I find it dificult to believe that the final product would need very little characterization, after all it is being carved from a block of porcelain.
Luke Eichmeyer <eich0092@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, November 07, 2002 at 07:19:54 (CST)
Great paper and presentation. I am going to do some work in the contemporary clinic sometime soon. It was good to see a little more about the CEREC system before I have a chance to use it.
Stephen Sawyer <sawy0071@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, November 06, 2002 at 23:30:47 (CST)
Good paper. Liked the cost analysis.
Ben Fenger <feng0032@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, November 06, 2002 at 21:31:57 (CST)
Does the use of partial coverage restorations lead to more cusp fractures and root fractures?
jason johnson <john4525@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, November 06, 2002 at 10:06:52 (CST)
I am really intrigued by the use of CEREC and Empress. It will be nice to see your presentation. Great paper!
stephanie miner <schw0438>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 10:06:37 (CST)
Great paper! I'm very interested in hearing what you have to say about this type of restoration.
Nathan Mork <morknp@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 10:00:30 (CST)
Thanks for the info on cementing ceramic restorations- It's always good to have a review of the properties needed for cement.
Steph Guy <guyx0015@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:52:37 (CST)
Nice approach--focusing on the things we lack the most attention on.
kelly reynolds <krol0068@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:49:50 (CST)
The cerac machine is definite technology of the future. The ability for someone to make just one appt. will for sure inc. the desire for a dentist with a cerac machine.
travis hanel <hane0044@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:48:41 (CST)
This is a great topic that we were assigned to do our presentation concerning. These restorations will be the future of dentistry in terms of esthetic restorations and must be used in the dentists arsenal of restorative materials.
Will Manke <mank0027@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:43:56 (CST)
The indepth info. on CEREC and Empress was great. While these are all the rage now, it will be interesting to see what we are in store for long term. How well will these restorations hold up? How fast will technology develop and leave the old CEREC machines obsolete? I guess we'll just have to wait and see!
Leslie Spangler <span0072@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:36:04 (CST)
I could see where a Cerec would be a good investment- especially for a group practice. That way you could share the cost, as well as make sure that it's busy making you money all day. Is there any way that Sirona could make this system's restorations compatible with RCT'ed teeth in the future?
Karl Haemig <haem0002@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:34:58 (CST)
I've seen some of these units. The milling procedure can put you in a trance . . . Anyway, the presentation should be interesting.
Peter Miskovich <misk0020@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:30:44 (CST)
I am interested to see the presentation and clinical case regarding this topic. It seems that CERAC and CAD/CAM are definately integral parts of our dental futures.
ryan tietz <tiet0020@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:27:12 (CST)
Good paper, I am looking foward to the presentation today and seeing the case report. Also how doing procelain wear against gold, just wondering with all the dental school pt. they seem to have a lot of gold in their mouths and I was wondering about this as an option of them.
Alyssa Hedstrom <lind0617@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 09:00:14 (CST)
I am excited to hear how the wear of opposing teeth is with the cerec porcelain, I hope you talk about that.
Craig Spieker <spie0089@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 08:57:11 (CST)
Good paper. Pretty expensive little toys to have around though.
Tom Tadysak <tady0005@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 08:57:00 (CST)
I think the cerec 3 is a great way of doing onlays, however, how difficult is it "realisticly" to get patients to have a porcelien onlay made when they could have an amalgam or composite placed instead? Also, if you did own a cerec 3 machine wouldn't it dictate your treatment to some extent, for example, you want to place a certain amount of onlays in a year to make the machine pay for itself
Mike Henrickson <henr0193@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 08:56:40 (CST)
Are the esthetics of anterior CEREC restorations less than other porcelain restorations? A considerable amount of glazing probably needs to be done to CEREC restorations because they are milled from one uniform block.
David Gilmer <gilm0069@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 08:42:03 (CST)
Does an amalgam buildup change the esthetics and/or retention/resistance properties enough to contraindicate an all porcelain restoration?
Michael J. Nelson <nels1959@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 08:33:59 (CST)
Great paper. It is always interesting to learn more about cerac technology. I only wish I had more of an oppurtunity to use this technology while I'm in dental school. It was great to see the demo at the vendor fair last week.
Brian Vieregge <vieregbl@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 08:13:57 (CST)
I feel that we as dentists will utilize all-ceramic restorations at an increasing rate in our future practice.
Ben Knutzen <knutzebt@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 07:59:09 (CST)
Really good paper. I enjoyed the detailed analysis of the CERAC system and comparison of materials. I look forward to your presentation, and critical comments regarding the practical aspects of CERAC use clinically.
Brian Barsness <bars0020@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 07:48:11 (CST)
i don't want to sound redundant, but the cerec stuff is interesting to all of us. the cost analysis was well done and informative. i can't wait to see the clinical slides of the only that sarah melstrom delivered to my own sweet roommate, katie. nice work!
Julie Smith <smit1631@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, November 05, 2002 at 07:46:29 (CST)
Good paper. Liked the cost analysis. I hope I get a chance to see or even use the cerec in the next couple years.
Patrick J Capp <capp0021@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 23:52:06 (CST)
The paper was great. I'm excited to see your case presentation and see how well the CERAC worked for your group clinically.
Eric Knaff <knaf0006@umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 23:17:18 (CST)
Great job on the paper. There was a lot of good information on the use of CAD/CAM technology, and specifically on the use of CEREC. As a recipient of a CEREC restoration, I knew a little bit about the process and your paper helped fill in some of the missing pieces.
Tim Osborn <osbo0075@umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 23:09:01 (CST)
I really enjoyed learning more about this topic since I didn't know a lot about it. it would be nice to have hands on experience before i graduate.
Jennifer LaBerge <luke0035@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 22:51:56 (CST)
It is very exciting to learn about such cutting edge technology! This is coming from the guy who has yet to do a composite filling. I am negotiating with Rockne even as we speak to get a loan for my own Cerec.
Gary Hedin <hedingj@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 22:50:23 (CST)
Great paper! Had a lot of useful information about the CAD/CAM and Cerec machines. I hope that we will all get some clinical experience with this at some point in the next two years. Look forward to the clinical presentation.
Aaron Johnson <john3097@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 22:44:07 (CST)
Cerec seems to be a very useful machine, i just recently visited an office with one. It also seems to be cost effective because it take about 8 crowns to pay for the loan on the machine, and this dentist had delivered 22 in the month of october. Although he did say it takes a serious time commitmant to learn how to use it.
Grant Raykowski <rayk0002@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 21:53:24 (CST)
It really sounds like the preparation, powder and picture need to be extremely accurate in order for the cerec system to operate to its fullest. I'm excited to see how the infrared camera is able to capture the details and learn more about the computer imaging in the dental office setting.
Ryan Francis <fran0540>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 21:48:58 (CST)
I am looking forward to your case presentation. Your paper gave me a lot of useful information about CAD/CAM technology. I only hope I will recieve some practical experience before graduating!
kellee kattleman <katt0013@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 21:34:16 (CST)
I am looking forward to your presentation. Your paper was very informative regarding the CERAC technology, I hope we will have a chance to work with this process over the next year and one-half.
Chris Wangen <wang0141@umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 21:22:56 (CST)
Great paper guys. Can't wait to hear more about the cad/cam tomorrow, and to see the clinical work you guys did!
Joshua Campbell <camp0385@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 20:55:55 (CST)
Very interesting paper! Sounds like CAD/CAM is really a way to go for future dentistry. I wonder in reality how long it may take for this technology become accessible to most of the dentists. 5 years? 10 years?
Lan Zhou <zhou0039@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 20:20:17 (CST)
Great paper guys. Looks like a solid "A." Can't wait to see the presentation tomorrow. Oh wait, I helped make it. Never mind.
Brett Knutson <knut0283@umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 19:34:06 (CST)
I really enjoyed getting the chance to work on this topic. It was interesting to learn more about CEREC and Empress.
Jon Matthes <matt0428@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 19:20:33 (CST)
Nice job on the paper! Thanks for all of the good info on the indirect methods. I hope we can all get an opportunity to use the cad/cam system before we leave school.
Brian McDonald <bmcdonal@umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 18:13:01 (CST)
Great paper! I am very interested in the use of the CAD/CAM, sometimes it is very important for a patient to get things done in as few appointments as possible. My aunt has experienced this benefit. Fun to see how the cost benefit worked out. Also interesting to hear it is no good for RCT teeth!
Jolene Welter <welt0081@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 16:41:23 (CST)
I think our paper did a great job of gathering and organizing a lot of information about a topic that none of us really knew much about. I think our presentation will be very informative.
Polly LoCascio <loca0008@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 15:01:41 (CST)
This was an interesting paper. I think that the advantages of ceramic including bonding and asthetics make it a great option over metal. While it's true that metal has passed the test of time, it appears that the advances in ceramic have brought its wear and durability to a level that dentists can have confidence in it as a viable treatment option.
Jim Healy <heal0052@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 14:52:01 (CST)
Great info about indirect restorations. I am trying to track down Dr. Olin so our PCG can use the CEREC machine. I hope it works well bacause I wouldn't mind using it in practice.
Matthew Berg <berg0522@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 14:50:50 (CST)
I really enjoyed getting the chance to work on this topic. I didn't know much about Cerec before and this really was a learning experience for me. We should all look forward to working with this technology in the future!
Kara Lobaugh <loba0008@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 14:14:56 (CST)
I was very unsure about cerec restorations before having one placed. A lot of my questions about the system were answered during the procedure. It also made me realize that it will take a lot of practice to become proficient. I look forward to the opportunity.
Katie Lantz <lant0025@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 13:11:04 (CST)
Good Paper. I am interested in hearing more about these different processes. The Cerec machine is an enormous savings to the patient who could have a crown that day. It is a service I would like to see become more cost effective for the general dentist.
Jeremy Wehrman <wehr0018@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 12:40:06 (CST)
Excellent paper! Thanks for explaining in detail all the esthetic, indirect restorative options. Just a couple questions - why do you not need full coronal coverage on the CEREC prep and why is there such a significant difference in success rate between vital and non-vital teeth?
Jessica Inglis <ingl0011@umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 12:07:27 (CST)
I found the advantages to using the CAD/CAM machine to be very interesting. I didn't realize that not only is there the convenience of a single visit to the dentist, but also a very impressive success rate, insignificant marginal gaps, and decreased trauma to the pulp. I can't wait to hear more during the presentation.
Ann Thiele <thie0097@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 08:18:49 (CST)
Well done. It is fun to see how much quicker we can make restotations. The Cerac machine may someda become standard in dental pratices if the price goes down. And I am sure it is just a matter of time before we will doing bridges in our clinics as well.
Bradley Morrison <morr0188@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 08:16:11 (CST)
It is always interesting to learn more about the Cerec machine, I am wondering how dependent do you think that we can become on this machine for future restorations?
Russ Dylla <rdylla@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, November 04, 2002 at 06:34:01 (CST)
I'm interested to hear about your experiences during your case presentation. I know you made a milled inlay. Did you find the procedure to be easy? difficult? How about as compared to the procedure of making a cast gold onlay?
Roxane Huber <hube0079@tc.umn.edu>
- Sunday, November 03, 2002 at 20:32:27 (CST)
Great paper! I can't wait to learn more about the CEREC machine and the case that your group did. I really hope I get a chance to use this technology before I graduate.
Erin Gannon <gann0033@tc.umn.edu>
- Sunday, November 03, 2002 at 20:07:20 (CST)
That CEREC machine sounds like quite the deal. I like the whole idea of not needing to place a temporary and re-appoint.
Erick <ehallie@hotmail.com>
- Sunday, November 03, 2002 at 17:58:57 (CST)
We constantly hear that porcelain restorations are detrimental to opposing teeth due to their abrasiveness ultimately requiring their replacement in the future. How do Cerac restorations compare to the traditional ceramic PFM restorations in their abrasiveness and wear to the opposing teeth?
Devin Croft <crof0017@tc.umn.edu>
- Sunday, November 03, 2002 at 17:29:32 (CST)
I'm excited to hear more about CEREC and Empress. What is the average cost to the patient for these services?
Monique Wood <wood0455@umn.edu>
- Sunday, November 03, 2002 at 13:04:49 (CST)
Nice Paper! I am jealous that some of you were able to use the Patterson Clinic and the CEREC machine--I am anxious to see how your case study turned out.
Emily Vober <vobe0003@tc.umn.edu>
- Saturday, November 02, 2002 at 22:41:21 (CST)
The cerec machines are very interesting. As they come out with more advances in milling technology, are dentist going to be able to readily and cheaply upgrade with these advances?
Bryan Johnson <john2819@umn.edu>
- Friday, November 01, 2002 at 12:54:28 (CST)
Nice paper, thanks for clearing up some aspects of CEREC. I hope to have a chance to try the system out before we graduate.
Todd Miller <mill1154@umn.edu>
- Friday, November 01, 2002 at 12:53:33 (CST)
Cerec is definitely a promising new method of restoring teeth. I wonder though, even after writing the paper, if it is really any better than what is already available to us.
Sarah Laszcwski Melstrom <slaszcws@umn.edu>
- Friday, November 01, 2002 at 12:08:20 (CST)
I would like to hear what your group has to say about "selling" Cerec restorations. At some point you have to use the machine to pay for it, so you would have to be able to "sell" cad cam restorations right?
Nathan Pedersen <pede0328>
- Friday, November 01, 2002 at 11:55:27 (CST)
I thought it was interesting that the CAD/CAM restorations had higher failure rates on non-vital teeth. Were any reasons given why?
Alisa Nord <anord@tc.umn.edu>
- Friday, November 01, 2002 at 11:50:04 (CST)
After reading group 5's paper, I have a better understanding of the treatments available to treat these lesions. It was interesting to find out that Cerac produces restorations with acceptable margins, because many instructors have told me otherwise. I tried it at the vendor fair and though it is technique sensitive, if you learn the software it is excellent.
Adena Borodkin <boro0038@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 16:14:43 (CST)
I like all new information about the Cerec system. The cost/benefit ratio needs to work out a little better but the paper filled in a couple quesions I was having
Dylan Ascheman <asch0013>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 12:24:55 (CST)
Well written paper. The Cerec system seems like the future of dentistry. Is the cost of the machines ever going to go down with increased usage in practices?
Jeremy Gross <gros0159@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 11:50:46 (CST)
I have seen this machine in action and actually have an inlay that was done with one of these machines. They're pretty impressive, but do require operator skill to make the them worth it. Time, as well as money, must go into this investment.
Heidi Nichols-Johnson <nichols_hi_d@hotmail.com>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:11:09 (CST)
Good paper. Did you happen to come across any good guidelines on when to do an MOD amalgam verses an inlay? I know in class they mentioned considering inlays under heavy occlusal stresses. In clinic it seems more arbitrary.
Thekla Olson <olso1118@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:40:38 (CST)
Good job on the paper. What exactly is the material of the block used in the CAD/CAM system. Does the ceramic block contain Zirconia and does it need to be fired?
Phillip Zhan <phzhan@yahoo.com>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 23:28:12 (CST)
Cerac is an incredible system and systems like it will be the future of dentistry, but how close are we to relying on these types of systems?
Steven Graber <grab0054@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 23:03:49 (CST)
Interesting paper group 5. Thanks for the added information on the CEREC system. Still pretty expensive though. I anticipate that the technology will keep improving............
Brent Swenson <swen0316@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 21:42:40 (CST)
I enjoyed hearing more about the CEREC system. I thought it was very interesting that they weren't as effective on non-vital teeth.
Brandon Owen <owen0133@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 11:51:43 (CST)
I have read that the cerac restorations don't have as good of margins as gold does, is there any difference in the longevity of these restorations?
Stephen Moore <moor0461>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 09:58:05 (CST)
It was very interesting to hear about some of the other types of indirect restorations that are out there. It is very interesting to hear about the things that we did not learn in class. I look forward to your presentation.
Aaron D. Imdieke <imdi0012@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 13:57:25 (CST)
You all had a great topic. Esthetic dentistry is surely a popular topic in today's dental office. I mostly enjoyed hearing about the Cerac and empress research.
Krista miller <Mill1021@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 12:09:07 (CST)
Nice paper. I enjoyed your little financial breakdown justifying the use of a Cerac machine in a dental office. Imagine the possibilities...
Adam L. Forster <fors0174@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 10:03:35 (CST)
Group 5 you did a great job on your paper. I am looking forward to your presentation and the work you did with the CEREC machine. You did a fine job going over the different options for porcelain indirect restorations. I would like to see the machine in action and finished products.
Sarah Como <scomo@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 09:48:08 (CST)
I liked the section on the CEREC system. We get little to no info on this piece of equipment and believe this is going to be a big part of dentistry in the future. Look forward to the presentation.
Brent Deragisch <dera0008@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 09:28:37 (CST)
With esthetic dentistry soon to become the mainstream, it is great to hear about CERAC and Empress restorations. These will no doubt play and important role in the esthetic transition that is now taking place in dentistry.
James Sigaty <siga0004@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 20:43:30 (CST)
Great paper, group 5! I'm glad that in the paper you reviewed the specific techniques in reference to Empress since I was still a little unsure on that.
Melissa McCartney <mcca0326@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 20:41:26 (CST)
I am excited that our group's topic is on veneers...I hope we all get a chance to work on a case, as they seem to be a popular but infrequent (?) treatment at the U. The lecture gave us a great base of information to start from.
Julie <smit1631@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, September 24, 2002 at 09:56:13 (CDT)
The lecture was very interesting in that it provided some numerical guidelines and proportions to use in doing esthetic restorations. Instead of looking at the restoration and trying to "eyeball it" in order to match up or make it look esthetic, these guidelines and rules will help me in making it the proper size, shape, and dimension and more than likely be more pleasing to the patient.
Brian McDonald <bmcdonal@umn.edu>
- Monday, September 23, 2002 at 23:04:14 (CDT)