MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of Cortical Perforations of Contiguous Donor Bone in a Guided Bone Augmentation Procedure: An Experimental Study in the Rabbit Skull

2002· article· en· W2073954216 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christer Slotte, Dan Lundgren

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStiftelserna Wilhelm och Martina LundgrensStiftelsen Handlanden Hjalmar Svenssons
KeywordsParietal boneSkullPerforationCortical boneAnatomyCoronal planeBone marrowMedicineDentistryMaterials sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It has been shown that bone can be augmented beyond the original skeletal envelope by using space-making barriers. Further, it has been suggested that perforation of the contiguous donor bone enhances bone formation in guided bone augmentation procedures. PURPOSE: The goal of the present investigation was to evaluate whether perforations into the donor bone marrow through the cortical plate, located contiguous to an extracalvarial experimental space, influence bone generation into this space with regard to augmented bone tissue volume and bone density 3 months postoperatively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two titanium cylinders, each with a titanium lid, were subcutaneously placed with their open ends facing the parietal bones of eight rabbits and secured with miniscrews. The cortical bone plate on the test side was perforated with seven evenly distributed holes, each with a diameter of 1.2 mm, using carbon-steel burs. Together, these perforations corresponded to about one-third of the total experimental bone area. The bone on the control side was left intact, and no bleeding occurred during the placement of the titanium lid. The perforation procedure (test side) resulted in various degrees of blood fill. After 3 months, the animals were sacrificed to obtain ground sections for histology and histomorphometry. RESULTS: The cylinders were found to be partly filled with tissue containing slender bone trabeculae and marrow spaces in abundance. The bone consistently reached a higher level at the inner wall compared with the central part of the cylinders (p = .001). Hollow connections between the experimental space and the skull bone marrow were found in the contiguous outer cortical plate in four of the seven control sites. No statistically significant differences could be demonstrated between the perforated test sites and the control sites regarding augmented tissue volume (64.4 +/- 18.9% vs. 64.9 +/- 22.2%) or bone density, although there was a tendency toward denser bone in the test sites (21.5 +/- 11.1%) versus control sites (14.7 +/- 5.4%). There was no statistical difference regarding relative bone-to-titanium wall contact (27.4 +/- 14.7% for test; 38.6 +/- 25.9% for control). Thickness (height) and density of the skull bone vault were measured in the area beneath and lateral to the cylinders. No significant differences could be observed regarding these parameters between the test and control side. There were no correlations between thickness (height) or density of donor bone versus amount or density of augmented bone. The degree of immediate blood fill could not be shown to correlate with augmented tissue volume or augmented bone density. CONCLUSIONS: In the present model, as observed 3 months postoperatively, cortical perforations of contiguous donor bone or degree of immediate blood fill of an extracalvarial experimental space were not found to enhance augmented tissue volume beyond the skeletal envelope. Although there was a much higher mean value for bone density of augmented bone in the test sites, the large variations failed to show significant intergroup differences.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations58
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207