Jury Score – Mauricio González – Case 2 – Direct Restauration
Diagnosis and treatment plan
8
Case Complexity
8
Quality of case documentation (Images)
10
Quality of case documentation (Text)
6
Accuracy of the execution of clinical procedures
7
Low degree of invasiveness
5
The quality of the immediate result (Post-op)
7
Follow-up
7
Stability over time of the result
7
Comments
This case was a previous orthodontically treated patient, with extractions of the upper first right and left bicuspids, and at the end of the orthodontic treatment, they finished Full Class II Molar, and class one cuspid, with the midlines on a 50% overbite, which I think was perfect. But unfortunately, although the post-orthodontic restorative esthetic treatment was very well planned and performed with very good photographs and laboratory and clinical performance. They did not solve the space in the midline by restoring the mesial interproximal contact points of the upper centrals, and they did not solve the space of the height of the papillae, which the peridodontist could have solved with ialunoric acid injections and/or an esthetic soft tissue graft. Also, at the end of the restorative treatment, the lower midlines were off and shifted to the right side by .5mm, which had already been solved. So they needed to perform a better occlusal refinement and equilibration.