Effect of Platform Shift on Crestal Bone Levels and Mucosal Profile Following Flap Surgery and Subcrestal Implant Placement in Presence/Absence of Gap Defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physiologic remodeling resulting in crestal bone loss appears a common corollary to dental implant surgery. Several hypotheses and clinical strategies have been advanced to explain and avert crestal remodeling; however, causative mechanisms remain unclear and the efficacy of clinical protocols uncertain. PURPOSE: The objective of the present study was to provide a histologic account of crestal bone levels and mucosal profile at implant sites receiving platform shift/switch and standard abutments following conventional flap surgery and subcrestal implant placement in presence or absence of crestal gap defects using a dog model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four dental implants were placed into the left/right edentulated posterior mandible in five adult male Hound Labrador mongrel dogs using flap surgery including subcrestal placement with/without a 1 × 5 mm (width × depth) gap defect, and using platform shift/switch and standard abutments. Block biopsies were collected for histological/histometric analysis following an 8-week healing interval. RESULTS: No significant differences in crestal resorption were observed among experimental groups; crestal resorption being significantly more advanced at buccal than at lingual sites (p < .001). Similarly, crestal bone-implant contact was not significantly different among groups; crestal bone-implant contact being consistently below the implant platform at buccal sites (p < .01). Moreover, the peri-implant mucosal profile was not statistically different among groups, the mucosal height being significantly greater at buccal than at lingual sites (p < .001). Also, no significant differences among groups were observed for the apical extension of the epithelial attachment, the epithelial attachment being arrested more than 2 mm above the implant platform at both platform shift/switch and standard abutments. CONCLUSIONS: Using a clinical strategy including flap surgery and subcrestal implant placement, implant technology comparing platform shift/switch with standard abutments, surgical approach, and abutment selection seems to have a limited impact on crestal remodeling, associated bone loss, and mucosal profile.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".