Smilestyler
Denturist
Full Member
- Messages
- 230
- Reaction score
- 5
Physiostar 552 and 992 shade A1
Condyloform II 34
Physiostar 552 and 992 shade A1
Condyloform II 34
Physiostar 552 and 992 shade A1
Condyloform II 34
I have not tried this in yet. I think my midline is close to my mark (at least from my rims). Sometimes I will deliberately move slightly it if my mark is off of the incisive papilla.
I usually let the lingual cusps sit right in the bottom of the fossae, I think there is supposed to be a bit more space between the buccal cusps for the lingualized set up, but to me it doesn't quite look right and I haven't had any issues with cheek biting. Until I do, I will keep the spacing to about 1mm.
The Candulator works well. I like the ergonomics of it. It is a smaller semi adjustable. It is a better articulator than the Stratos 100, comparable to the 200, but the Stratos 300 is hands down the best (of what I have anyhow) I like the leg on top so it doesn't over open. I like the shape of the corner supports so it doesn't require the kickstand like the Stratos. The condyle adjustments and not as ideal, with small knobs and only the condylar angle is adjustable, but once they are set I don't look at them again until the next case. The condyle locks are not as smooth but I am getting used to them. I really like the standard magnetic mounting plates, someday i might get all my Stratos converted. $$$$ There is no facebow, but I bought an adapter kit that allows me to use my transferbow (Ivoclar facebow) and it allows Kavo and a few others also. I think the limited condylar adjustments and lack of facebow are because the Swiss concept that these are made for don't call for those clinical measurements.
I find that the recommended lowers are petty close, at least no different than any other tooth company. This case is a bit retrognathic and that always screws up the overjet and thereby the ideal lower ants. I will see how they look in the mouth. The posteriors may not appear to be in their ideal medial distal position, but these are designed to be tooth to tooth as opposed to the normal tooth to 2 teeth. It's a bit weird at first I admit. I'm not sure why they went this way. They use quite a bit of Gerber's theories which are less conventional.
I can get some eccentric photos after they are past the tryin stage. I don't want to disappoint you with what you see now
You may also want to check into the flat mounting plate from Ivoclar. I have many clients that can give me the information needed from the max
bite registration ( lip support, mid-line, and plane of occlusion). Using that along with the mounting plate gives an excellent reference point to start
with. 95 percent of the time, case comes back, finish.
What is the name of the plate you are talking about?
Maxillary Wax up, Phone Pic, Not so great.
Looks very nice dmonwaxa....However it appears that the vestibules are a bit underextended unless they are alginate impressions...We have been taught to fill them full but that assumes a properly bordermolded PVS impression .....So hard to make assumptions using pictures here....
Were this a conventional treatment, I would be loathe to fill the vestibules unless we were employing a processed baseplate. The probability of introducing an interference that hinders the temporary baseplate from seating, that couldn't be chased down and adjusted because everything's in wax instead of processed resin, makes it not really worth it.Looks very nice dmonwaxa....However it appears that the vestibules are a bit underextended unless they are alginate impressions...We have been taught to fill them full but that assumes a properly bordermolded PVS impression .....So hard to make assumptions using pictures here....
Were this a conventional treatment, I would be loathe to fill the vestibules unless we were employing a processed baseplate. The probability of introducing an interference that hinders the temporary baseplate from seating, that couldn't be chased down and adjusted because everything's in wax instead of processed resin, makes it not really worth it.
You'll discover this when you translate schooling to clinical realities.
Have to disagree. With custom impression trays and a properly border molded impression we want to fill the vestibules up to avoid food getting past the tissue flexion line which for all intents and purposes is exactly the border of a pvs border molded impression. On our practical examinations we were not allowed to reduce the flanges from the vestibular sulcus at all. We had to submit our final border molded impressions so that the examiners could compare the finished denture with the final impressions border. Were they not the same we would flunk.....
Ken,denturist-student, this is just showing the waxed element of the process; contours and surface detail, i just posted what I found at the moment, I have to find the complete series of photos from dslr, anyways. The patient had an existing dtr, Treatment plan was conventional as with a CD up to the try in.....ie imp, wax rim and record base and wax try in. A bar was made using the finalized setup as a guide,,,,,this is the wax-up over the bar,,,,,sorry for the confusion denturist-student. Ken I agree, while in theory filling the vestibules has an advantage as with assisting in forming a seal, its not always necessary for a good fit especially during function. In 30 yrs working with prosthodontists we've had to modify the flanges to alleiviate sore spots, yet had little or no impact in the retention. I'm a firm believe in more is better, its better to have more and then adjust rather than not have it and have to add. This is just the transfer of the accepted setup,over the bar. I apologize for any confusion.
I agree entirely.
I am a firm believer in occupying all the space that should be. Vestibules are dynamic environments, and flanges have to balance the line between sealing the borders and avoiding getting tossed out by muscle attachments in function.
My point was this is something that can only be done in resin, not in wax.