MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reconstruction of the Severely Resorbed Maxilla with Autogenous Bone, Platelet-Rich Plasma, and Implants: 1 -Year Results of a Controlled Prospective 5-Year Study

2005· article· en· W1972410798 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlatelet-rich plasmaMaxillaDentistryMedicineProspective cohort studyOrthodonticsPlateletSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic treatment of the edentulous maxilla may require bone augmentation to enable placement and integration of dental implants. This constitutes a complex healing situation, and resorption of the grafted bone and failure of the implants often occur. The application of autogenous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been suggested to improve incorporation and preservation of bone grafts. PURPOSE: The aim of this controlled clinical study was to evaluate whether PRP in conjunction with grafting of particulated autogenous bone to the maxilla could improve the integration and clinical function of dental implants. An additional aim was to compare block bone grafts without PRP with PRP-treated particulated bone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nineteen consecutive patients were included in the study and treated with iliac bone grafts and dental implants in the maxilla according to a split-mouth design. In the anterior maxilla, particulated bone mixed with PRP (test) was compared with onlay block grafts without additional PRP (control). In the posterior maxilla, particulated bone grafts with (test) or without (control) PRP were placed as sinus inlay grafts. After 6 months of healing, 152 implants (8 implants/patient) (TiOblast, Astra Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden) were placed. Test (PRP; 76 implants) and non-PRP (76 implants) sides were evaluated and compared by implant survival rate, marginal bone level, and implant stability using resonance frequency analysis (RFA) during 1 year in function. RESULTS: Two control implants in control sites in two patients were lost at abutment connection. After 1 year in function, no further implants were lost, giving an overall survival rate of 98.7%. The marginal bone level measurements showed no significant differences, although there was a tendency toward less resorption on PRP sides. RFA measurements showed statistically significantly higher implant stability quotient values for PRP sites at abutment connection in the anterior but not in the posterior regions. CONCLUSIONS: The present clinical study showed that a high implant survival rate and stable marginal bone conditions can be achieved after 1 year of loading in the maxilla following autogenous bone grafting whether or not PRP is used. RFA measurements revealed differences at abutment connection, which could be explained by the type of graft rather than as an effect of PRP. Although no obvious positive effects of PRP on bone graft healing could be demonstrated, the handling of the particulated bone grafts was improved.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.331 · 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