Intraoperative Measurement of the Distance from the Bottom of Osteotomy to the Mandibular Canal Using a Novel Ultrasonic Device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In our previous study, we found that a novel ultrasound (US) device may serve as a useful intraoperative tool to measure the distance from osteotomy to the inferior alveolar canal (IAC). PURPOSE: To validate our previous results in a larger group of osteotomies in the posterior mandible. METHODS: During dental implant placement surgery, osteotomies were created using a standardized 2-mm-diameter pilot drill. The distance from the bottom of the osteotome to the IAC was assessed using an ultrasonic device and compared with a standard panoramic radiograph used to measure the same residual distance. The total distance from the crestal bone to the IAC was measured on a preoperative computed tomography (CT) and compared with total US measurements by summing the drill depth with residual depth measurements. RESULTS: Mean radiographic and US residual distances were 5.19 ± 1.95 mm, 5.01 ± 1.82 mm, p = 0.79 respectively. These measurements presented strong positive correlations (r = 0.61, p = .01). Mean total CT distance was 13.48 ± 2.66 mm; mean total US calculation was 13.69 ± 2.51 mm. No significant difference was found (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The results support our previous pilot study and confirm that the tested US device identifies the IAC and measures the distance from the osteotomy to the roof of the mandibular canal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".