CATEGORY 70 AUSTRALASIAN DENTIST CLINICAL as these blended well with the adjacent dentition and supported a more authentic aesthetic outcome. The soft-tissue response following grafting was also favourable, contributing to a balanced and wellsupported emergence profile. Colour evaluation was carried out on a stable baseline following completion of whitening. At this stage, the patient was satisfied with the shade of her natural dentition, establishing a clear reference point for the definitive restorations. The increased chroma evident in the canine region – particularly when compared with the contralateral side – was acknowledged by all parties, reinforcing the importance of achieving a natural transition in colour and depth within the final restorations. From a technical standpoint, the temporary phase also highlighted subtle spatial considerations within the interproximal zone, underscoring the need for careful control of form and surface transition during the definitive ceramic build-up. These observations further emphasised the importance of material choice and layering strategy in achieving seamless integration. Overall, the temporary phase served its intended purpose: validating the proposed design, confirming tissue behaviour, and establishing a precise aesthetic reference. This allowed the focus to shift confidently toward material execution and refinement during the final ceramic build-up. Shade Taking Protocol: As usual, shade taking was approached as a multi-reference process rather than relying on a single tab or viewing angle. In my workflow, three different shade tabs (with corresponding gingival holders) are assessed from two primary perspectives – frontal and lateral – with the patient positioned edge-to-edge. This approach allows for a more reliable evaluation of both value and chroma, particularly in cases where the surrounding dentition displays high translucency and natural variation. The lateral view is especially important, as it reveals colour transitions and depth that are often underestimated from a frontal perspective alone. This becomes critical when attempting to integrate a restoration seamlessly into an existing dentition rather than creating a uniform or over-simplified appearance. Photographs taken using polar_eyes filters form a key part of the protocol. By eliminating surface reflections, these images make it significantly easier to assess the degree of translucency, internal saturation, and natural characteristics of the enamel and dentine structure. In my experience, polarised images provide a more accurate and repeatable reference than conventional photography, particularly when subtle optical differences matter. The eLAB protocol was used as an additional reference point to support shade communication and verification. While not relied upon in isolation, it serves as a useful cross-check – helping to minimise interpretation errors and reduce the risk of disappointment or colour mismatch at the try-in stage. Taken together, this layered approach to shade taking establishes a stable and predictable foundation for ceramic buildup, allowing material behaviour and surface refinement to be guided by accurate visual data rather than assumption. The Fabrication of Final Restorations and Ceramic Build-up: In today’s restorative landscape, the increasing dominance of monolithic, CAD/CAM-manufactured restorations has brought undeniable efficiency and consistency, but often at the expense of individuality. As workflows become increasingly standardised, many restorations begin to share a similar visual language regardless of case-specific nuance. For ceramists seeking to operate at a high-end or master level, the ability to move beyond digital uniformity and reintroduce controlled individuality has become increasingly important. The fabrication of the definitive 14– 12 restorations in this case followed a deliberately conservative and controlled approach. As I’ve been demonstrating throughout my career, rather than relying on extensive post-firing adjustment, the primary objective was to maintain anatomical intent throughout the ceramic build-up phase, allowing form, optical depth, and surface character to evolve additively. This approach supports greater biological and aesthetic coherence, particularly when integrating with adjacent natural dentition exhibiting complex translucency and surface morphology. The core ceramic build-up was completed using Noritake CZR, which remains my preferred system for establishing primary colour dynamics and foundational aesthetics on zirconia frameworks. Its handling behaviour and optical predictability provide a stable platform, particularly in cases requiring subtle transitions and refined value control. At the semi-completed stage, the restorations could have been finalised conventionally. However, closer evaluation revealed a localised interproximal challenge: the separation between the pontic and the abutment resulted in a small zone of negative space in the 13–12 region, visually exposing root form. While biologically acceptable, this presentation was aesthetically suboptimal in the context of a youthful, high-demand outcome. When working on bridge cases – particularly where the point of separation must terminate directly over an abutment surface – the reproduction of an interdental papilla presents a recognised prosthetic limitation. Even with optimal surgical intervention and ridge augmentation, complete papilla formation in such areas is biologically constrained by the absence of a tooth–tooth or implant–tooth interface. In these situations, the use of gingival ceramic should be regarded not as a compensatory measure, but as a legitimate aesthetic strategy to restore visual continuity of the soft-tissue architecture. Figure 13: Shade taking from frontal view Figure 14: Shade taking from lateral view Figure 15: Shade taking from lateral view (with polar_eyes) Figure 16: Shade taking (with polar_eyes and eLAB Grey Card)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTc3NDk3Mw==