Effects of Flapless Implant Surgery on Soft Tissue Profiles: A Prospective Clinical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Flapless implant surgery has been suggested as a suitable treatment modality for the preservation of soft tissue after implant placement. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the extent of soft tissue profile changes around implants after flapless implant surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 44 patients received 76 implants using a flapless implant procedure. The marginal level of the peri-implant soft tissue was evaluated using dental casts 1 week, 1 month, and 4 months after implant placement. RESULTS: The mean soft tissue levels around implants showed 0.7 ± 0.3 mm of coronal growth 1 week after surgery. At 1 month, the levels were 0.2 ± 0.2 mm coronal growth and at 4 months, the values were 0.0 ± 0.3 mm. Soft tissue profiles assessed 4 months after flapless implant placement were similar to profiles assessed immediately before implant placement. CONCLUSION: Flapless implant surgery is advantageous for preserving mucosal form surrounding dental implants.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".