Minimally Invasive Sinus Lift Implant Device: A Multicenter Safety and Efficacy Trial Preliminary Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In cases of advanced maxillary sinus atrophy of the bone (pneumatization), the sinus floor has to be augmented in order to obtain acceptable bone volume for implantation. The objective of the present study is to evaluate a new procedure and device, designed as a closed sinus lift using a dedicated dental implant that allows for Schneiderian membrane elevation and the placement of a flowable bone replacement graft. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen patients (8 males, 10 females) underwent 23 procedures. All procedures were completed successfully, with elevation of the sinus membrane and insertion of bone graft and the dental implant at the planned site. No membrane tears were noted. No intraoperative or postoperative adverse events were observed in any of the cases. There were no postprocedural emergency or distress calls. RESULTS: The patients' average age was 52 (range 38-72). The mean residual alveolar ridge height was 5.5 mm (range 4.0-7.0). The average bone gain was 11.2 mm (range 9-13) after an average healing period of 8.7 months (range 6.7-13.1). All implants achieved clinical stability and prosthetic rehabilitation was uneventful. CONCLUSIONS: A closed sinus floor elevation procedure can be accomplished using a dedicated dental implant that allows for hydraulic elevation of the Schneiderian membrane and placement of a flowable bone replacement graft and dental implant placement all at the same time with minimal patient discomfort.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Clinical safety and efficacy trial of a dental sinus lift implant device.
The trial evaluates a dental implant procedure, not research practice.
Dental implant clinical trial of a sinus-lift device, domain medicine.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".