Bilateral Sinus Elevation Evaluating Plasma Rich in Growth Factors Technology: A Report of Five Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential effects of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) technology and its autologous formulations in five consecutive patients in which bilateral sinus lift augmentation was carried out. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Five consecutive patients received bilateral sinus floor augmentation. All patients presented a residual bone height of class D (1-3 mm). The effects of PRGF combined with bovine anorganic bone (one side) were compared with the biomaterial alone (contralateral side). The effects of using liquid PRGF to maintain the bone window and autologous fibrin membrane to seal the defect were evaluated. A complete histological and histomorphometrical analysis was performed 5 months after surgery. RESULTS: One patient was excluded from the study as the Schneiderian membrane of the control side was perforated during the surgery. In two patients, the biopsies obtained from the control sides 5 months postsurgery were not acceptable for processing. PRGF technology facilitated the surgical approach of sinus floor elevation. The control area was more inflamed than the area treated with PRGF technology. Patients referred also to an increased sensation of pain in the control area. PRGF-treated samples had more new vital bone than controls. In patient number 1, image processing revealed 21.4% new vital bone in the PRGF area versus 8.4% in the control area, whereas in patient number 2, 28.4% new vital bone was quantified in the PRGF area compared with the 8.2% of the control side. The immunohistochemical processing of the biopsies revealed that the number of blood vessels per square millimeter of connective tissue was 116 vessels in the PRGF sample versus 7 in the control biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results suggest that from a practical point of view, PRGF may present a role in reducing tissue inflammation after surgery, increasing new bone formation and promoting the vascularization of bone tissue.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".