Missing context
An unlabelled mesh does not identify the intended restoration, material or approved reference. Supply the prescription and case stage. If several scans are attached, distinguish their roles and identify which version is current.
Unclear boundaries or artifacts
Incomplete preparation boundaries, holes or scan artifacts may prevent dependable interpretation. The designer can identify the concern, but the submitting clinical team decides whether additional records are needed. Do not treat reconstructed geometry as confirmed anatomy.
Conflicting relationships
Multiple bite records or references with different positions need a clear instruction about the approved relationship. Identify whether a reference is diagnostic, provisional or final. A visually plausible alignment is not a substitute for clinical direction.
Unidentified implant components
An implant brand alone may not identify the platform, scan body, connection or restorative component. Provide the physical part information and applicable digital library. If there is uncertainty, obtain confirmation before designing against it.
An output request without a receiving workflow
Tell the designer how the returned file will be used. Specify software, version, material and production route. If a native case is required, state it before design begins. Use a representative test case to check the route before relying on it for recurring work.
Triage the uncertainty before editing the mesh
A problem near a relevant boundary is a different decision from an isolated object outside the intended design area. First describe what you see, which decision depends on it and what evidence would resolve it. This keeps a software cleanup action from silently becoming an assumption about the clinical record.
| Observed concern | Question to resolve | Handoff action |
|---|---|---|
| Missing or unclear boundary | Can the responsible submitting team identify the intended boundary from the supplied records? | Request a marked clarification or replacement record; identify which design work is held. |
| Conflicting jaw relationships | Which bite/reference is approved for this stage? | Name the approved record and replace superseded versions explicitly. |
| Unidentified scan body | Which exact physical part and supported digital library apply? | Obtain identification before selecting the component chain. |
| Unlabelled reference mesh | Is this a diagnostic proposal, provisional record or approved reference? | Label its purpose and whether it governs form, relationship or neither. |
| Import or orientation discrepancy | Is the disagreement in the source package, export or receiving setup? | Test the agreed package in the receiving environment before changing geometry. |
Keep cleanup separate from approval
3Shape documents scan-refinement options for issues such as isolated artifacts and holes. exocad documents loading an alignment scan to revisit antagonist alignment. These are software capabilities, not proof that a particular reconstructed area or relationship is correct for your case.
In this proposed review process, keep the original record, name the edited copy and explain what changed. If the disputed area governs a restoration boundary, component match or jaw relationship, the responsible team must decide whether the available evidence is sufficient. Record that decision instead of describing every cleaned mesh as “fixed.”
An actionable clarification request
Illustrative wording—not a Pristine case record: “Please confirm which bite file governs this stage. The two submitted references show different relationships. Revision B is held for review until the approved reference is identified; the marked view shows the disagreement.”
A useful note includes an observed discrepancy, affected work, decision owner and requested evidence. It does not diagnose a clinical problem from a screenshot. Record the resolution in the exception log so the receiving team knows why design restarted.
Supporting documentation
Official software documentation checked October 6, 2026. The review framework above is Pristine’s editorial guidance, not a vendor-prescribed clinical protocol. Consult current manuals for software operation.
Prepared by Pristine Dental Design · October 6, 2026. Workflow guidance for dental professionals. Case-specific instructions and receiving-team approval govern actual design and production.