Lateral Bone Window Closing Technique with Poly‐<scp>L</scp>‐Lactic Acid (<scp>PLLA</scp>) Membrane in the Augmentation of the Maxillary Sinus without Grafting Material: Evaluation of Bone Healing in a Rabbit Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: When augmenting the maxillary sinus without grafting material, the method used to cover the bony window is a subject of debate. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) membrane as closing material of the lateral window in a maxillary sinus augmentation without bone grafting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Augmentation of the maxillary sinus without grafting material and installation of titanium screws that fix the Schneiderian membrane were performed in 18 Japanese male white rabbits. The bony window was covered with a collagen membrane or PLLA membrane or no membrane. The animals were sacrificed at 4 or 8 weeks. New bone volume was calculated radiologically using microcomputed tomography (micro-CT). The samples were analyzed histologically after toluidine blue staining. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in the new bone volume, as measured by micro-CT. However, histomorphometric analysis demonstrated the superiority of the PLLA membrane in new bone formation compared with the collagen membrane. CONCLUSION: The PLLA membrane is a suitable material to be applied for tissue regeneration in this animal model.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".