Histomorphometric Analysis of Human Maxillary Sinus Lift with a New Bone Substitute Biocomposite: A Preliminary Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze radiographic and histological outcomes of maxillary sinus floor augmentation using a calcium-sulfate based allograft containing demineralized bone matrix particles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen maxillary sinus lift procedures with simultaneous placement of titanium implants were performed in 12 patients of both genders aged 36-71 years. Each sinus cavity was filled by the biocomposite. After 3 months of healing, all surgical sites were uncovered and bone biopsies were retrieved for undecalcified histology and histomorphometry. The ratio between the original and the grafted sinus height (GSH/OSH) was computed using a panoramic radiography taken immediately after surgery and at 3 months of healing, and the two ratios were compared by Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: By 3 months, all implants were stable without clinical and radiographic signs of infection. Significant changes in GSH/OSH during healing were seen (2.7 +/- 0.6 initially vs. 2.6 +/- 0.5 after healing; p = 0.01). Histologic findings showed newly formed bone surrounding the residual grafted particles without inflammation. At 3 months, mean regenerated bone density was 33.8 +/- 8.6%; marrow spaces amounted to 32.3 +/- 10.3%; residual graft was 33.9 +/- 9.0%. Similar histomorphometric and radiographic results were obtained independently from patient age or sex. CONCLUSIONS: The analysed putty seems to be a safe and effective graft material for maxillary sinus floor augmentation by accelerating bone regeneration and thus reducing the healing time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".