The Establishment of a Protocol for the Total Rehabilitation of Atrophic Maxillae Employing Four Zygomatic Fixtures in an Immediate Loading System – A 30‐Month Clinical and Radiographic Follow‐Up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The existing approaches to the treatment of the atrophic maxilla are difficult and involve an element of risk. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to establish a new surgical/prosthetic protocol for the treatment of extremely atrophic maxillae using four zygomatic implants (ZIs) in an immediate loading system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve patients were treated with the surgical placement of 48 ZIs, and the totally edentulous maxillae were rehabilitated with protocol-type maxillary prostheses rigidly fixed to the ZIs in an immediate loading system. Follow-up was conducted at 6 months and again at 30 months. RESULTS: Of the 48 ZIs inserted, one implant failed to achieve osseointegration. The prosthetic components fitted well and no sinus pathology was detected in any of the patients. CONCLUSION: The surgical/prosthetic protocol showed that it was possible to insert four ZIs in an immediate loading system and achieve stability for up to 30 months.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".