Dental I/O scan workflows

Mark H

Mark H

Member
3 shape lab wanting to import primescan stl's - I understand the Sirona has the bite information attached to the STLs of the upper and lower arches?
Looking for insight into how to make this articulate.

Thanks in advance.
 
Gru

Gru

Well-Known Member
Full Member
This thread is likely to be one of the greatest in value to me of all time.Thanks LabGuy!

For anyone who can answer:
I use Exo, but not sure that should matter.
Which I/O scans suffer the least loss when translated to open .stl format?
 
OP
TheLabGuy

TheLabGuy

Just a Member
Full Member
This thread is likely to be one of the greatest in value to me of all time.Thanks LabGuy!

For anyone who can answer:
I use Exo, but not sure that should matter.
Which I/O scans suffer the least loss when translated to open .stl format?
A good question...not really sure. I use Exo too and I don't really see much loss of information. I know the scanners are getting better and better, able to capture more and more data with every update. I'm curious if it's even clinically significant at this day and age.
 
JMN

JMN

Christian Member
Staff member
Full Member
A good question...not really sure. I use Exo too and I don't really see much loss of information. I know the scanners are getting better and better, able to capture more and more data with every update. I'm curious if it's even clinically significant at this day and age.
The definition of clinically significant has progressively been degraded to a point that a technician retiring 30 years ago would throw a full scale tantrum at the 'quality' that is sometimes acceptable today. When I last made PFMs 4 years ago we fought for 25 micron margins and checked under 10x scopes. Now we're okay with nearly half a mm of stacked error in our systems.

I'm pleased with the advances of materials, technology and techniqes, but I have lots of misgivings about what we've done with them.

We've become suppliers to WalMart. With bespoke prices to the end users. And it's really bothering me.
 
Gru

Gru

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Let me clarify my question of "loss". When a Cerec scan is designed in Cerec and sent straight to the mill, it appears under a 10x microscope to be superior to the same file sent to inLab and produced.

Further, take a Medit scan by a scan only lab, and send to another Exo system to design and mill. I know for certain the parameters need to be adjusted to make the restoration fit the original model, while a scan in house and produced on the same system has a different fit.

Does all translation degrade quality?
 
N

NYJHL

Member
Full Member
3 shape lab wanting to import primescan stl's - I understand the Sirona has the bite information attached to the STLs of the upper and lower arches?
Looking for insight into how to make this articulate.

Thanks in advance.
true.
 
Manny Ramirez

Manny Ramirez

Member
Full Member
FYI: You can create a MeditLink account as Clinical Admin and a Lab Admin if you wish. The application installation is the same but if you log in as clinical admin you will be presented with the MeditLink lab version. For Exocad and Maestro Studio users, the Lab version allows bridging to Exocad or Maestro Studio directly for a better workflow. On version 2.1 (right now in beta stage) they are going to include a scan body library and the ability to draw margins. Keep in mind that with the Medit i500 you can scan impressions if you need to add additional information to a case and soon they will be adding the ability of watertight the arches with ortho bases for clear aligner cases. The scanner keeps getter better
 
Last edited:
Toothman19

Toothman19

Active Member
Full Member
Not trying to hijack your thread or anything, but I've made a few videos on the I/O scan workflow. I'll be adding more in the very near future. Right now there is 3M tru def, iTero, and Atlantis Core files. Cerec and trios are up next

 
OP
TheLabGuy

TheLabGuy

Just a Member
Full Member
Here is the Cerec import workflow

Question...cerec still making you buy a sirona scanner to get there software? I ask because in your video you stated you needed a cerec connect account and a sirona software version of 15+?
 
M

Misjaaa

New Member
Question...cerec still making you buy a sirona scanner to get there software? I ask because in your video you stated you needed a cerec connect account and a sirona software version of 15+?
In other part of the world you are able to buy a standalone app/portal with a license dongle which you load with the key. App/portal is called Connect Case Center Inbox. After you register your account ( very similar to previous version of portal called Sirona Connect - which needed the purchase of inLab Sw in order to work ),you will be able to receive the scans from Cerec and convert them into following file types: .stl ; .projectinfo ; .udx ; .wavefrontOBJ. Also worthy mentioning is that you can integrate your full InLab hardware with Exocad Valleta ( latest version of Exocad I belive ) and handle the case a-z ( from scanning to fabrication ) with your inLab hardware. There is a tutorial on how you can integrate your inEos X5 with Exocad Sw.

@Mark H : Related to your request I believe that you can use meshmixer to articulate them and export them to your 3shape sw both in the same time or worst case scenario manually correlate them in 3shape sw if it allows you so. I am not very familiar with 3shape sw, sorry. In previous versions of InLab SW export options, there was a 3shape file supported format called 3se/3si ,but I havent seen it with many 3shape users lately.
 
Toothman19

Toothman19

Active Member
Full Member
Question...cerec still making you buy a sirona scanner to get there software? I ask because in your video you stated you needed a cerec connect account and a sirona software version of 15+?
In the US you have to buy the scanner, at least the last time I checked. You can buy a European dongle and use it here though
 
daintybutton

daintybutton

Member
Full Member
Do any of you who work in labs/etc and Receive digital scans with 2+ different branded scan bodies who process them to print your own models in house have issues with the fit of your analogs when you print a single model due to the spacing requirements on the analog offset vs printing separate models?

Two totally hypothetical examples:
Ex. A) Dr. X scans #19 with TruAbutment scan body, also scans # 30 with DentaSwiss scanbody.
Ex. B) Dr. X scans case with #9 TruAbutment and #7 with DentaSwiss scan bodies for a bridge case.
  • Lab builds case A as two separate models fabs case no issue due to ability to cut model where needed and make it work as two files.
  • Lab builds case B as one model, depending on the brand of the scanbody model builder has different offsets for analog spacing and can't get both analogs to fit correctly in model. Either one or the other will fit accurately where the other has a loose/tight fit and doesn't work.

How do you get around this, outside of asking the doctor to use all the same brand scan body? Not every doctor wants to replace their scan bodies when their previous ones are still functional. Is this just still a problem when it comes to mixed use on implant scans? Taking all suggestions using 3Shape, Exocad, Meshmixer, whatever. Just curious on a functional solution that doesn't require either the doctor to change their process or us to just print a model, make a pvs template and make it in an unconventional conventional way.

Thanks in advance! I hope I explained this clearly enough; I will cross-post this into another forum as well, but I thought this would be a good place to start since it's pretty relevant to the convo and crowd.
 
JMN

JMN

Christian Member
Staff member
Full Member
Do any of you who work in labs/etc and Receive digital scans with 2+ different branded scan bodies who process them to print your own models in house have issues with the fit of your analogs when you print a single model due to the spacing requirements on the analog offset vs printing separate models?

Two totally hypothetical examples:
Ex. A) Dr. X scans #19 with TruAbutment scan body, also scans # 30 with DentaSwiss scanbody.
Ex. B) Dr. X scans case with #9 TruAbutment and #7 with DentaSwiss scan bodies for a bridge case.
  • Lab builds case A as two separate models fabs case no issue due to ability to cut model where needed and make it work as two files.
  • Lab builds case B as one model, depending on the brand of the scanbody model builder has different offsets for analog spacing and can't get both analogs to fit correctly in model. Either one or the other will fit accurately where the other has a loose/tight fit and doesn't work.

How do you get around this, outside of asking the doctor to use all the same brand scan body? Not every doctor wants to replace their scan bodies when their previous ones are still functional. Is this just still a problem when it comes to mixed use on implant scans? Taking all suggestions using 3Shape, Exocad, Meshmixer, whatever. Just curious on a functional solution that doesn't require either the doctor to change their process or us to just print a model, make a pvs template and make it in an unconventional conventional way.

Thanks in advance! I hope I explained this clearly enough; I will cross-post this into another forum as well, but I thought this would be a good place to start since it's pretty relevant to the convo and crowd.
Good question. Do not cross post please, we just end up diluting the information.
 
2thm8kr

2thm8kr

Beanosavedmysociallife
Full Member
.
Just curious on a functional solution that doesn't require either the doctor to change their process or us to just print a model, make a pvs template and make it in an unconventional conventional way
If you don't convince them to change then you can't really expect to have a predictable and consistent technique. The easiest solution for me has been to tell them which scan bodies to use and provide them. Let them know where they can purchase more or sell them extras. I customized some exocad libraries to avoid this type of situation otherwise I would spend more time on working out a solution than the case is worth.

As for printed models and accuracy for implants. If the crowns or splint/bridge is in the same quadrant or a single in different quadrants and cement retained I do them without models in most instances. If a model was necessary then I would print a solid with the designed abutments in place. For screw retained I'm not convinced desktop printers are consistent enough to do anything but singles.

Would love to hear what others have done to overcome this and what printers, software, and library/DIM analogs.
 
OP
TheLabGuy

TheLabGuy

Just a Member
Full Member
Do any of you who work in labs/etc and Receive digital scans with 2+ different branded scan bodies who process them to print your own models in house have issues with the fit of your analogs when you print a single model due to the spacing requirements on the analog offset vs printing separate models?

Two totally hypothetical examples:
Ex. A) Dr. X scans #19 with TruAbutment scan body, also scans # 30 with DentaSwiss scanbody.
Ex. B) Dr. X scans case with #9 TruAbutment and #7 with DentaSwiss scan bodies for a bridge case.
  • Lab builds case A as two separate models fabs case no issue due to ability to cut model where needed and make it work as two files.
  • Lab builds case B as one model, depending on the brand of the scanbody model builder has different offsets for analog spacing and can't get both analogs to fit correctly in model. Either one or the other will fit accurately where the other has a loose/tight fit and doesn't work.

How do you get around this, outside of asking the doctor to use all the same brand scan body? Not every doctor wants to replace their scan bodies when their previous ones are still functional. Is this just still a problem when it comes to mixed use on implant scans? Taking all suggestions using 3Shape, Exocad, Meshmixer, whatever. Just curious on a functional solution that doesn't require either the doctor to change their process or us to just print a model, make a pvs template and make it in an unconventional conventional way.

Thanks in advance! I hope I explained this clearly enough; I will cross-post this into another forum as well, but I thought this would be a good place to start since it's pretty relevant to the convo and crowd.
If Doc wants to scan his/her implants it's MANDATORY in our lab that the scan markers/flags come from the lab. That's the rule in our lab, takes this kind of migraine out of the equation each and every time.
 
daintybutton

daintybutton

Member
Full Member
If Doc wants to scan his/her implants it's MANDATORY in our lab that the scan markers/flags come from the lab. That's the rule in our lab, takes this kind of migraine out of the equation each and every time.
Right. And they did come from us. For different implants. And Biohorizons 3.0 has limited options that are visible on a pano. So, when they needed one that was, they got one that was different than the previous 5 they use and it worked fine for the previous cases they've scanned on. Until this one. So the mandatory coming from our lab is moot in this situation.
 
L

lostinthe907

New Member
So just so I am clear on this. (we are using 3shape)
Dr has a Prime Intraoral scanner, we have connect case inbox, when the Dr. scans files he can easily send us the following file types;
.STL
.OBJ
.Dentalsystem
.UDX
and a .DXD file
no issues there.
Now other then Creating a Case and using the .STLs as "digital impressions", we are trying to find away to import all the information from the prime scanner ( tooth number, material, so on...) but 3shape only mentions .UDX ( that comes from the prime scanner) as an import option But it never converts correctly based on the format of the .XML file. i tried fixing the XML file to fix the import but it never works.
so Aside from purchasing Inlab software to convert the .DXD to a .3SE is there a way to import the case as a whole?
or is there a way for the prime scanner to export .3SE files directly?
Using the STLs as "digital impressions" has worked without issue, but it open a chance for information to be missed or put in wrong.

Am i missing something or does this sound right?
 
OP
TheLabGuy

TheLabGuy

Just a Member
Full Member
Adding some more information on this one.
-3MTruDef sold, I guess 3M doesn't want to be into the i/o scanning business anymore. However, everything is the same other than who you call to set up your portal if your a newbie or need changes. The portal is still 3Mconnectioncenter though.
-Cerec, now has a portal for folks who don't want Sirona scanner (because before that's the only way you were getting scans directly, you had to buy there scanner) but now it cost $3,000 for the portal. @doug can you clarify if it's per year or one time fee?
-Trios inbox for Exocad, this is the portal for Exocad users receiving Trios scans directly. Only thing to report here is that they increased there yearly fees a couple hundred dollars via resellers for the inbox.
If anyone else has anything else, please share, or knows of a different system...feel free to throw it out there.
 
Guest Room
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • Chat Bot:
    Room has been pruned!
    Chat Bot: Room has been pruned!
    Top Bottom