7:45a.m.–12p.m. Rocky Mountain Ballroom
SUNday, July 13
Dr. Mark Wertheimer
Dr. Sylvain Chamberland
Dr. Mark Wertheimer has been in specialist orthodontist practice since 1996. He has been actively involved with various dental boards and societies during his career and is currently a past Director on the Board of the South African Dental Association; and also past President of the South African Society of Orthodontists.
Dr. Chamberland received his DMD degree from Laval University in 1983, a Certificate in Orthodontics from University of Montre- al in 1990 and a Master degree in dental science in 2008 from Laval University where he was part time clinical instructor and teacher at the undergraduate program of the dental faculty from 1991 to 2008. He
During his career, Dr. Wertheimer has maintained a keen interest in keeping abreast of new trends and technology in orthodontics and has attended many congresses, both locally and internationally. The most recent being an intensive course in San Francisco dealing specifically with Different Types of Maloc - clusion with or without Dysfunctional Problems as it relates to occlusion. Dr. Wertheimer graduated as a dentist in 1986 at the University of the Witwatersrand. He graduated as an orthodon- tist in 1995 and went on to be admitted as a Fellow of the Col- lege of Dentistry of SA in the branch of Orthodontics in 1996. He was involved in the teaching of postgraduate orthodontic students in the Orthodontic department at the Wits Dental School over a period of 16 years. Are Implants in the Esthetic Zone a Wise Choice – Revisiting the Dilemma of Missing Teeth Missing teeth in the esthetic zone are encountered often. This maybe congenital, or in later life due to various factors, for exam- ple, trauma. While implants may be an obvious option, evidence has proven that they often present significant challenges in later years. This lecture explores the various options for treating pa - tients with missing teeth in the esthetic zone, and references the various problems that may arise based on contemporary scientific evidence. Patient examples will be used to illustrate these chal - lenges and the options for treatment. Learning Objectives • Identify the salient questions regarding treatment for missing teeth in the esthetic zone. • Review the evidence related to implants in the esthetic zone. • Explore options to mitigate challenges during treatment of missing teeth in the esthetic zone.
lectures in several graduate programs and scientific meetings in the US, Canada and Europe. He is also a published author. Old School is Not Bad School The aim of this lecture is to review throughout a retrospective look at cases treated early in my career ask if I would treat them nowadays, what would I do differently. Several new technologies appear in the orthodontic fields, the bone biology and the tooth don’t know where the force to move from whether it is a bracket, a wire of plastic. One should keep in mind that bracket, wire or plastic don’t move teeth. Force and momentum does. The bone biology did not change, and it tends to be forgotten if one listens to some advertisements from many com- panies and their KOL. They want us to try this new magic device for this or that and the orthodontist become the beta tester and may get stuck with failure of the new device to obtain the claimed benefit. A good understanding of biomechanics is mandatory to de - liver efficient force systems to move the teeth. Tip back mechanism, intrusive arch, T-loop retraction spring, box loop, transpalatal arch and lingual arch are tools that I still use on a routine basis. Over the years, I have tried several appliances because I tend to be an early adopter, but in retrospect, I learned the hard way that such or such thing may not work, or the learning curve could be steep. The use of TADS to treat open bite and MARPE for trans- verse deficiency are good example of new technologies that changes the treatment approach of several malocclusions. We will do some time traveling showing cases with transverse deficiency treated with 3-piece Le Fort 1 to SARPE , to MARPE to DOME . Surgical treatment planning has evolved from models on articula- tor, free-hand surgery to 3D surgical planning. We will discuss direct bonding versus indirect bonding. What is the advantage or disadvan- tage. We will review the treatment approach for OSA patient, com- plex inderdisciplinary treatment involving perio, prostho and surgery. Learning Objectives • Explore the biomechanics and old school techniques to deliver efficient force systems to move the teeth. • Understand that new systems are not always better than old systems. • Review treatment approaches complex interdisciplinary treatments involving perio, prostho and surgery.
6
www.cdabo.org
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker