MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long‐Term Results for Maxillary Rehabilitation with Dental Implants after Tumor Resection

2012· article· en· W1571698524 on OpenAlex
Wei Huang, Yiqun Wu, Duohong Zou, Zhiyong Zhang, Chenping Zhang, Jian Sun, Bin Xu, Zhiyuan Zhang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRehabilitationMaxillaDentistryImplantPatient satisfactionSurgeryPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Defects of the maxilla due to tumor extirpation can create accordingly high levels of psychological and physical trauma for patients and their families. However, the reconstruction of maxillary defects remains very challenging. Today, using autogenous bone grafts and dental implants is an effective method to restore maxillary defects. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of maxillary rehabilitation with dental implants after tumor resection. Patient satisfaction after maxillary reconstruction was also assessed with regard to function and comfort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over a 6-year period (2000-2005), 24 patients with maxillary tumors underwent resection with either immediate (n = 18) or delayed reconstruction or underwent prosthetic rehabilitation (n = 6).The patients received 88 implants in total, including 9 zygomatic and 79 conventional implants, for maxillary rehabilitation of the defective areas. RESULTS: Autogenous bone grafts were successful in all patients, although partial loss of the graft was observed in one patient who received an iliac graft. Patient follow-up was started at the point of the prosthetic loading of implants. The median treatment time was 99.1 months (range:18-137 months). One patient died after 18 months of follow-up due to tumor recurrence, and two patients were lost to follow-up after 3 years of observation. Ten conventional dental implants were removed due to peri-implantitis. Six patients chose implant-supported obturators. The cumulative survival and success rates of the implants were 88.6 and 86.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the rehabilitation of maxillary defects following tumor resection using implant-supported fixed prostheses with autogenous bone grafts or prosthetic rehabilitation is successful and is associated with high patient satisfaction. Oral function can be restored using dental implants for patients with maxillary defects.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.370 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it