Glad it was helpful!

Glad it was helpful!

Glad you enjoyed it

Not without introducing inaccuracies in the mounting. The best bet is to thin out the maxillary cast. It sounds to me like the capturing of the facebow needs to be adjusted to prevent that from happening again

Hi Rashed! I am happy you enjoyed it. I am not familiar with how interchangeable those are. I am more familiar with hanau and stratos. More schools are transitioning from Hanau to Stratos but in everyday practice, most dentists are using digital dentistry and the use of articulators and facebows are decreasing. As far as mounting, the best is magnetic plates which allow for easy transfer of cases while using a singular articular. Dentistry is so much fun and the advances in digital dentistry are very exciting.

@@DrCharlieCage Thank you very much for such a helpful reply. I appreciate it very much. I'll probably email the makers of various articulators and get their feedback. Thanks once again.

They are sprayed before transferring to the lab and can be handled without gloves.

@@DrCharlieCage actually i m also Prosthodontist.. one article clearly states immersing is suggested to kill most microbes...but it affects properties of impression material so use spray...it means it doesn't kill all microbes not...its better than nothing but not best...gloves are for your safety doc and your patients from cross infection 🙏

@@nihalg23 I understand, there is always an article to support one thing or another. so my question is, did the study you mentioned say the change was statistically significant? As a prosthodontist, I'm sure you understand the areas that can introduce inaccuracies (impression material, impression technique, mixing stone, mixing technique etc). No matter what, verification of your mounting should be done by assessing the occlusal stops on your patient intraorally and comparing it to the model. Having unsanitized bite-registration on stone models sounds unsanitary and understanding a stone model cannot be sanitized properly due to its porosity. Even if it was sprayed, there is plenty of evidence that shows it can affect the hardness of the stone which can lead to decreasing the surface hardness resulting in more abrasion and then...inacurracies. This is all a moot point as most clinicians are moving to digital impressions and bite registration. Anyways, as a post-graduate educator for dentists and practicing clinician for over 11 years, I would not advocate for using bite registration without sanitizing it (ALL LABS SANTIZE BITE-REGISTRATION UPON RECEPT TO THE LAB). Also understanding the limited contact time with chemicals on the bite registration and the minute effects it may have on accuracy. Please reconsider sanitization issues and if not, then we will just agree to disagree!

I’m not sure if I understand your comment but let new try and let me know if this makes sense. If doing 6 veneers only (not changing posterior occlusion) I would mount my casts in MI. I will take and mount CR record if I’m changing posterior occlusion (eg. increase VDO, full mouth rehab). Generally…understanding that there are always exceptions

@@DrCharlieCagethanku after preparation face bow tranfer and bite registration should taken then mount both cast .

@@harshsharma7057 yes, if a facebow is taken, then mount that, then mount mandibular cast in MI.

Hi there! Great question! This facebow is compatible with the hanau. You can see they fall under the whipmix family and if you look at the website you will be that they are compatible. Why did we use this particular combination? It’s because this is what they provide the students at most dental schools which is why I did the video. The anterior reference is captured during the facebow not the mounting.

@@DrCharlieCage you got me intrigued now Dr Cage, I'll have a look at the brochure of the articulator 😏

@@AmritAssi :) I have the link here! www.whipmix.com/products/denar-slidematic-dental-facebow/

Thanks for the link. I'll dig up more 😏