MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cone Beam Computed Tomographic Measurement of Maxillary Central Incisors to Determine Prevalence of Facial Alveolar Bone Width ≥2 mm

2010· article· en· W1657680080 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hessam Nowzari, Shervin Molayem, Ching Hsiu Ketty Chiu, Sandra K. Rich

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaxillary central incisorMedicineCone beam computed tomographyDental alveolusDentistryAlveolar processFacial boneSoft tissueCrestOrthodonticsComputed tomographyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The initial thickness of maxillary bone has significant impact on the responding level of facial bone and soft tissue after extraction and immediate implant placement. A prevailing notion is that following implant placement in fresh extraction sites, at least 2 mm of facial bone is needed to prevent soft tissue recession, fenestration, and dehiscence. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to use cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to measure horizontal width of facial alveolar bone overlying healthy maxillary central incisors and to determine prevalence of bone thickness ≥2 mm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tomographic data from 101 randomly selected patients were evaluated by two independent observers. Assessments were made of facial bone width at levels 1.0 to 10.0 mm apical to the bone crest. RESULTS: Healthy maxillary central incisors (n= 202) were measured from 101 patient scans. The percent of teeth with facial bone ≥2 mm at levels 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 mm from the bone crest was 0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, and 2.5%, respectively. Overall mean thickness of the bone was 1.05 mm for right and left central incisors combined. The range of individual measurements for all levels was 0 to 5.1 mm. The occurrence of ≥ 2 mm thickness bone measurements increased with increasing depth. However, mean widths observed at levels 6 to 10 mm from the crest ranged only 1.0 to 1.3 mm because of apparent fenestration occurrence (0 mm bone) in approximately 12% of teeth. Overall, no significant differences in bone thickness were found between ethnic, gender, age, or scan groups. CONCLUSIONS: Using CBCT, occurrences of ≥2 mm maxillary facial alveolar bone were found on no more than 3% of root surfaces 1.0 to 5.0 mm apical to the bone crest in this sample of maxillary central incisors. The study evidenced prevalence of a thin facial alveolar bone (<2 mm) that may contribute to risk of facial bone fenestration, dehiscence, and soft tissue recession after immediate implant therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations157
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207