MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138735326 · doi:10.1902/jop.2008.070263

Performance of Threaded Versus Sintered Porous‐Surfaced Dental Implants Using Open Window or Indirect Osteotome‐Mediated Sinus Elevation: A Retrospective Report

2008· article· en· W2138735326 on OpenAlexafffund
Jaffer Kermalli, Douglas Deporter, Jim Yuan Lai, Ernest W.N. Lam, Eshetu G. Atenafu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Periodontology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsOsteotomeDentistrySinus (botany)MedicineWindow (computing)PorositySinus liftMaterials scienceOrthodonticsMaxillary sinusOsteotomyComposite materialComputer scienceWorld Wide WebBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective report was to evaluate the performance of dental implants placed in a teaching environment in patients requiring maxillary sinus elevation. METHODS: Threaded (acid-washed or sand-blasted acid-etched) and sintered porous-surfaced (SPS) press-fit implants were used. Sinuses were managed using direct (open window) or indirect (osteotome-mediated) techniques. Records were available for 97 implants in 62 patients. Preoperative subantral bone heights were determined from radiographs, primarily panoramic. Of 69 threaded implants used, 40 and 29 were placed using direct (DTH) and indirect (ITH) techniques, respectively. Twenty-eight SPS implants were placed using the indirect technique. Implant failure rates using the Kaplan-Meier method of analysis and cumulative crestal bone loss (the latter based on bone levels seen in the most recent radiographs) were determined for both types of implants. RESULTS: The mean preoperative subantral bone height for DTH implants was 5.0 mm (range, 1 to 12 mm). Preoperative bone heights for ITH implants and SPS implants placed using the indirect approach were 7.2 mm (range, 4 to 12 mm) and 4.2 mm (range, 3 to 6 mm), respectively. Significant differences in preoperative bone height were seen between DTH and ITH implants (P <0.0001) and between ITH and SPS implants (P <0.0001). Average functional times were 18.7 months and 16.3 months for DTH and ITH implants, respectively, whereas the average functional time for SPS implants was 49.9 months. Time in function was significantly greater (P <0.0001) for SPS than DTH and ITH implants. Significant differences in implant length were also seen, with SPS implants significantly shorter than DTH or ITH implants. Three implants failed to integrate, one in each of the three treatment groups, giving initial survival rates of 97.5%, 96.6%, and 96.4% for DTH, ITH, and SPS implants, respectively. Mean cumulative crestal bone loss measurements were 1.84, 1.90, and 0.57 mm for DTH, ITH, and SPS implants, respectively. Bone loss was significantly less with SPS implants than with DTH or ITH implants. A second SPS implant failed after 7 years in function, likely because of prosthetic deficiencies. This late failure reduced the Kaplan-Meier survival rate to 80.4% for the SPS group. CONCLUSION: Results from this teaching clinic suggest that the use of dental implants with sinus elevation procedures is a predictable treatment for the resorbed posterior maxilla.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PeriodontologySame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207