Treatment of Circumferential Defects with Osseoconductive Xenografts of Different Porosities: A Histological, Histometric, Resonance Frequency Analysis, and Micro‐<scp>CT</scp> Study in Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Finding the most effective method of minimizing the gap effect in alveolar crest remodeling constitutes a clinical challenge for immediate implant technique. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of osseoconductive xenografts with different porosities in the crestal bone region, with and without guided bone regeneration, over immediate implant installation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five bone defects (6 mm in diameter/4 mm depth) were prepared on one side of the mandibles of twelve dogs. Implants of 3.3 × 10 mm were installed on the mesial side of each defect, providing a 2.7-mm distal gap. Defects were randomly filled with autogenous bone, coagulum, a deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) block, a DBBM sponge, or DBBM granules. The same procedures were performed on the opposite side after 8 weeks. Collagen membranes were used to cover the defects on half of the sides. The animals were sacrificed after 8 weeks. The outcomes were evaluated by histology, histomorphometric analysis, resonance frequency analysis, and micro-CT analysis. RESULTS: The histomorphometry showed the DBBM sponge to provide similar bone formation to autogenous bone at 8 weeks without a membrane. The coagulum rendered better bone formation at 16 weeks (membrane) (p < .05). The DBBM block exhibited the poorest results between treatments (8 and 16 weeks, with or without membrane). Micro-CT analysis revealed increasing bone surface values in sites with DBBM granules, followed by the DBBM sponge (8 weeks without membrane) and autogenous bone at 8 weeks with membrane (p < .05). Porosity analysis of the biomaterials showed the highest number, volume, and surface area of closed pores in DBBM granules. The DBBM block presented the highest volume of open pores, open porosity, and total porosity. CONCLUSIONS: The high-porosity block (DBBM block) failed to provide greater bone repair within the defect. Biomaterials with lower porosity (DBBM sponge and granules) showed similar or higher bone formation when compared with autogenous bone.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".