Radiographic Monitoring of Changes in Bone Height after Implant Placement in Combination with an Internal Sinus Lift without Graft Material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective was to investigate changes in bone height after implant placement in combination with simultaneous internal sinus lift (ISL) without graft material. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For a retrospective clinical study, 101 implants placed in combination with ISL without graft were selected. The study included 66 patients (mean age 59.6 years) with radiographs from baseline (T0) and two follow-ups after mean times of 7 months (T1) and 17 months (T2). Apical changes in bone height were measured at the mesial and distal aspects of the implant. Correlation analysis was performed to identify factors affecting changes in bone height. RESULTS: Mean apical bone gains of 1.0 mm (mesial) and 1.7 mm (distal) were observed at T1. At T2, mean apical bone gains were 1.5 mm and 2.1 mm (distal). The change in apical bone height was significant between T0 and T1, between T0 and T2, and between T1 and T2. Rank correlation analysis revealed a significant correlation (Spearman rho: -0.2 to -0.4) between small initial bone height and a greater amount of apical bone gain. CONCLUSIONS: A gain in apical bone height can be expected if implants are placed in combination with ISL without graft material. Variability is high, however.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".