MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A Surgical Stent for the Brånemark Novum® Bone Reduction Procedure

2004· article· en· W2015717033 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurent Barteaux, Philippe Daelemans, Chantal Malevez

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersErasmus+
KeywordsReduction (mathematics)Dental alveolusStentImplantDentistryOrthodonticsDental prosthesisRadiographyMedicineComputer scienceSurgeryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Brånemark Novum concept (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) was introduced to load implants immediately with a definitive fixed prosthesis in the edentulous mandible. This concept is based on the use of prefabricated templates to allow precise placement of three implants and a prefabricated bar structure for the prosthetic procedure. To obtain three-dimensional stability in these prefabricated templates, surgical bone reduction may be necessary to obtain a stable adaptation between the templates and the recipient bone site. PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to design a surgical stent for predictable reduction of the residual alveolar crest prior to the implant placement procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A predetermined alveolar crest platform based essentially on a lateral cephalometric radiographic evaluation was simulated on a cast in order to design a transparent resin surgical guide. The predictability potential of the procedure was then evaluated in 10 patients. The prosthetic outcomes were compared with those of a similar group of 10 patients treated without the presented stent by evaluating two factors, namely, the anterior dimensions of the prostheses and the required posterior adjustments of the upper bar. RESULTS: Correlation analysis of our series suggested a good predictability potential for this procedure (r = 0.9215). The mean anterior prosthetic dimension was 32% lower and was more predictable (narrow range of 8-12 mm vs broad range of 8-21 mm) when the stent was used. Furthermore, since half as many posterior adjustments of the upper bar were required, the laboratory procedure was facilitated. CONCLUSION: This individualized guide allows appropriate bone reduction for obtaining a predictable surgery and prosthetic stage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research→Same topicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→