Its ease of use, wide range of functionality and HD imaging capabilities make the Sirona GALILEOS Comfort Plus perfect for your practice.
Discussions relating to Cone Beam CT and dental implants.
I would rather compromise some on the prosthetic rehabilitation to so that I can attain a viable implant osseointegration.
I have had several patients who previously have had dental implants and now have had a CBVT.
Is CBVT really necessary for easy implant cases?
Is computer guided implant surgery always successful to the extent that laying a flap is really not necessary?
Field of view refers to the area of the anatomy that is captured by the CBCT scan. Most practitioners placing dental implants are interested in acquiring data from the maxilla and mandible. The standard fields of view can be used to capture the temporomandibular joint complex, the paranasal sinuses, as well as the maxilla and mandible…
I have just started using Cone Beam Volumetric Tomography (CBVT). Is it possible to read these without having to purchase expensive software line NobelGuide or Simplant?
I have read some articles about the using the FDK algorithm to compensate for artifacts or distortions in cone beam ct imaging.
I am just starting out in reading a cone beam volumetric scan to place my own dental implants. I recognize the anatomical structures. What I am having difficulty with is interpreting the dimensions.
After reading about the use of Cone Beam Volumetric Tomography (CBVT) to treatment plan implant placement, I feel that I may not be doing all that I can to insure the best implant placement.
How accurate is a Cone Beam scan when the patient has metallic restorations like amalgams, crowns and bridges?
Basically, he says that no other CBCT scanner has the low contrast silica detector system of the i-CAT system.
I am having difficulty finding out the state regulations for a cone beam ct machine.
I’m wondering how this warning about CT scans extends to Cone Beam Volumetric CT scans that we use in dentistry?
If we compare the use of lasers to the traditional surgical approach, lasers clearly are the better choice. Using a laser to perform implant surgery enables us to prepare the implant site with minimal trauma to the hard and soft tissue.
Dr. Scott Ganz developed the Triangle of Bone concept to analyze bone quality, quantity and disposition at prospective dental implants sites utilizing CBCT scans.
When the dentist is confronted with the problem of placing implants in a knife edge ridge, the CBCT scan and software enable the dentist to visualize the anatomy of the ridge in 3-dimensions.
The 1st International Congress on 3-Dimensional Dental Imaging was held in New York City last week. Didn’t have time to attend? Not to worry, what follows is Part I or our three part summary of this important event for implant dentistry…
I have been using panoramic radiographs to plan dental implant placement. I have the patient wear an occlusion rim with 5mm diameter steel balls to gauge bone dimensions. This has worked well for me for the last ten years. I place and restore dental implants.
Is anyone able advise as to any risks or suitability of the iCat Cone Beam scan for pregnant women? How safe is the radiation dose?
I have read that Cone Beam CT can be used to evaluate old extraction sockets, and whether they have healed properly or not.
Last week, Imaging Sciences International, Inc., the manufacturer of the iCat Cone Beam 3-D dental imaging system, announced that it has been acquired by Danaher Corporation. How does this effect the overal market for Cone Beam CT? Will we see the technology gain larger adoption now in dental implantology?
Due to the advent of dental CBVT technologies, the bar has been raised in the field of dental implantology. This is one of those times when dentistry is going to have to take one giant step forward and embrace a new technology that may intimidate those unfamiliar with it or haven’t tried enough to appreciate its benefits.
Discuss the SimPlant Platform and its many applications in implant dentistry.
He said what we should all be doing now is using a CT scan and a computer- generated guide stent. Am I still in the stone age with my diagnostic models?