Alveolar Ridge Regeneration with Equine Spongy Bone: A Clinical, Histological, and Immunohistochemical Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the case of localized ridge atrophy, a ridge augmentation procedure, with the use of bone substitutes and barrier membranes, may then be necessary. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was a clinical, histological, and immunohistochemical evaluation of an equine spongy bone in alveolar ridge augmentation procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five patients showing horizontal mandibular ridge defects participated in this study. A ridge augmentation was performed through an onlay apposition of equine bone covered by a titanium-reinforced membrane. After 6 months of healing, five bone cores from nonaugmented sites (control) and five from augmented sites (test) were retrieved. RESULTS: In test sites, no postoperative complications occurred. Horizontal bone width increased from 24 to 37 mm. In control sites, the newly formed bone represented 33%, and in test sites, 35% of the total area. The mean value of the microvessel density was 25.6 +/- 3.425 per mm(2) in controls, while 33.3 +/- 2.5 vessels per mm(2) in the test sites were found (p < .05). Both groups showed a high intensity (++) of vascular endothelial growth factor expression in the newly formed bone, while a low intensity (+) was found in the mature bone. CONCLUSION: Equine bone appeared to be biocompatible and to be associated with new vessel ingrowth. Within the limits of the small sample size, the present study indicated that equine bone could be used in mandibular ridge augmentations.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".