Controlling Bone Graft Substitute Microstructure to Improve Bone Augmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vertical bone augmentation procedures are frequently carried out to allow successful placement of dental implants in otherwise atrophic ridges and represent one of the most common bone grafting procedures currently performed. Onlay autografting is one of the most prevalent and predictable techniques to achieve this; however, there are several well documented complications and drawbacks associated with it and synthetic alternatives are being sought. Monetite is a bioresorbable dicalcium phosphate with osteoconductive and osteoinductive potential that has been previously investigated for onlay bone grafting and it is routinely made by autoclaving brushite to simultaneously sterilize and phase convert. In this study, monetite disc-shaped grafts are produced by both wet and dry heating methods which alter their physical properties such as porosity, surface area, and mechanical strength. Histological observations after 12 weeks of onlay grafting on rabbit calvaria reveal higher bone volume (38%) in autoclaved monetite grafts in comparison with the dry heated monetite grafts (26%). The vertical bone height gained is similar for both the types of monetite grafts (up to 3.2 mm). However, it is observed that the augmented bone height is greater in the lateral than the medial areas of both types of monetite grafts. It is also noted that the higher porosity of autoclaved monetite grafts increases the bioresorbability, whereas the dry heated monetite grafts having lower porosity but higher surface area resorb to a significantly lesser extent. This study provides information regarding two types of monetite onlay grafts prepared with different physical properties that can be further investigated for clinical vertical bone augmentation applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".