MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Surgical Intervention in Enchondral and Membranous Bone: Intraindividual Comparisons in the Rabbit

2003· article· en· W2046599414 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christer Slotte, Dan Lundgren, Lars Sennerby, Anna Karin Lundgren

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStiftelsen Handlanden Hjalmar Svenssons
KeywordsMedullary cavityMedicineAnatomyCortical boneResorptionMaxillaBone marrowBone tissuePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The long bones, which are of enchondral origin, are often used in histologic evaluations of dental implants that clinically will be placed in bones of membranous origin. PURPOSE: The aim of this investigation was to study the effect of surgical trauma by multiple drill perforations on both enchondral and membranous bone--the tibial and maxillary bone architecture--8 weeks after surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In eight rabbits the medial metaphyses of both tibiae and the edentulous ridges of both sides in the maxilla were surgically exposed. On the test sides, 25 to 30 holes were drilled through the cortical plate and 5 mm into the medullary space. The contralateral sides underwent no treatment and served as controls. Eight weeks later the animals were killed to obtain transverse ground sections for histomorphometry. A paired analysis of the bone densities of the tibiae and the jaw specimens was made. RESULTS: In general the morphologic appearances of the test and control tibiae were similar. In the control group the anatomy of the medullary space appeared normal, with few bone trabeculae and with abundant marrow tissue. In the test group, areas of resorption were evident on the cortical bone plate that had been perforated 8 weeks previously; also evident were ingrowths of marrow tissue and bone formation. In a few specimens some newly formed bone trabeculae were found in the medullary space, both contiguous to the perforated cortical bone plate and as small islets in the marrow tissue. The mean test and control site values for each parameter were similar, and no statistically significant differences were found. In the maxilla, the bone architecture had altered substantially by way of an increase in the proportion of trabecular bone and a decrease in the proportion of cortical bone. Drilling appeared to have little effect on tibial bone density, which did not significantly differ between test and control sites. Maxillary bone density, however, was significantly greater at the test sites than at the control sites. Comparisons of bone density between tibia and jaw specimens revealed no significant differences either between test sides or between control sides. Thus, the same magnitude of surgical trauma that altered the bone architecture and density of the rabbit maxilla was not found to have altered those of the tibia in the same animal 8 weeks after surgery. The reasons for the differences are discussed in this article. CONCLUSIONS: As observed 8 weeks post surgery, multiple drill perforations were not found to cause significant alterations in the metaphysis of the tibia whereas a considerable change in bone architecture and an increase in bone density were found in the maxilla. Whether this depends on different embryologic origins or reflects morphologic and functional differences in the mature bone demands further study.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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