Connective Tissue Characteristics around Healing Abutments of Different Geometries: New Methodological Technique under Circularly Polarized Light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe contact, thickness, density, and orientation of connective tissue fibers around healing abutments of different geometries by means of a new method using coordinates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following the bilateral extraction of mandibular premolars (P2, P3, and P4) from six fox hound dogs and a 2-month healing period, 36 titanium implants were inserted, onto which two groups of healing abutments of different geometry were screwed: Group A (concave abutments) and Group B (wider healing abutment). After 3 months the animals were sacrificed and samples extracted containing each implant and surrounding soft and hard tissues. Histological analysis was performed without decalcifying the samples by means of circularly polarized light under optical microscope and a system of vertical and horizontal coordinates across all the connective tissue in an area delimited by the implant/abutment, epithelium, and bone tissue. RESULTS: In no case had the connective tissue formed a connection to the healing abutment/implant in the internal zone; a space of 35 ± 10 μm separated the connective tissue fibers from the healing abutment surface. The total thickness of connective tissue in the horizontal direction was significantly greater in the medial zone in Group B than in Group A (p < .05). The orientation of the fibers varied according to the coordinate area so that internal coordinates showed a higher percentage of parallel fibers in Group A (p < .05) and a higher percentage of oblique fibers in Group B (p < .05); medial coordinates showed more oblique fibers (p < .05); and the area of external coordinates showed the highest percentage of perpendicular fibers (p < .05). The fiber density was higher in the basal and medial areas (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Abutment geometry influences the orientation of collagen fibers; therefore, an abutment with a profile wider than the implant platform favors oblique and perpendicular orientation of collagen fibers and greater connective tissue thickness.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".