MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molar Intrusion with Implants Using a Bite Plane Appliance: A Case Report

2008· article· en· W2042632549 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Satoshi Kato, Michiko Kato

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrusionResonance frequency analysisImplant stability quotientDentistryMolarMaxillaOrthodonticsMedicineOsseointegrationImplantSurgeryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Orthodontic forces for tooth intrusion ought to be continuous and low, which may be achieved with the help of osseointegrated implants. PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to describe a method to intrude supererupted maxillary molars using interarch intrusion mechanics (a bite plane appliance) with implants and to assess anchor implant stability through resonance frequency analysis (RFA; Osstell, Mentor version 2, Integration Diagnostics AB, Göteborg, Sweden) in comparison with nonanchorage control implants during orthodontic intrusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 48-year-old female patient was treated with implants (36 and 37 regions, Brånemark Implant System, MkIII TiUNite, Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden; lengths, 13 and 10 mm; diameter, 5 mm) serving as orthodontic anchorage for intrusion of supraerupted teeth in the maxilla (teeth 26 and 27) using a bite plane appliance. The force of intrusion applied was individual discontinuous bite force in the present case. The control implants were in the sites 45, 46, and 47 with healing abutments out of loading. Stability of both the anchorage and control implants was assessed by RFA from the commencement of orthodontic intrusion (7 months after the first-stage surgery) to the end of the study (19 months after the first-stage surgery). Marginal bone height measurements of both implants were performed on radiographs at the same time. RESULTS: The treatment was completed without complications or abnormalities of the intruded teeth or the opposite anchorage implants. However, implant stability quotient values of the anchored implants obviously changed during the initial 4 months after commencement of intrusion compared with control implants. In the present case, an intrusion of 2.2 mm was achieved in 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The present method made it possible to intrude molars successfully. However, further studies with more cases are needed to clarify the reliability of the method and determine how to control the bite forces applied as orthodontic load.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0090.004
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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsFrench-language works237,207