Deproteinized bovine bone mineral in marginal defects at implants installed immediately into extraction sockets: an experimental study in dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the influence of deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) particles concomitant with the placement of a collagen membrane on alveolar ridge preservation and on osseointegration of implants placed into alveolar sockets immediately after tooth extraction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The pulp tissue of the mesial roots of (3) P(3) was removed in six Labrador dogs and the root canals were filled. Flaps were elevated in the right side of the mandible, and the buccal and lingual alveolar bony plates were exposed. The third premolar was hemi-sectioned and the distal root was removed. A recipient site was prepared and an implant was placed lingually. After implant installation, defects of about 0.6 mm wide and 3.1 mm depth resulted at the buccal aspects of the implant, both at the test and at the control sites. The same surgical procedures and measurements were performed on the left side of the mandible. However, DBBM particles with a size of 0.25-1 mm were placed into the remaining defect concomitant with the placement of a collagen membrane. RESULTS: All implants were integrated into mature bone. No residual DBBM particles were detected at the test sites after 4 months of healing. Both the test and the control sites showed buccal alveolar bone resorption, 1.8 ± 1.1 and 2.1 ± 1 mm, respectively. The most coronal bone-to-implant contact at the buccal aspect was 2 ± 1.1 an 2.8 ± 1.3 mm, at the test and the control sites, respectively. This difference in the distance was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The application of DBBM concomitant with a collagen membrane to fill the marginal defects around implants placed into the alveolus immediately after tooth extraction contributed to improved bone regeneration in the defects. However, with regard to buccal bony crest preservation, a limited contribution of DBBM particles was achieved.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".