Long‐term Evaluation of Peri‐implant Bone Level after Reconstruction of Severely Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla via Vertical and Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration in Combination with Sinus Augmentation: A Case Series with 1 to 15 Years of Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To the best of the authors' knowledge, there is very limited clinical data on the outcomes of simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) for horizontal and/or vertical bone gain for the reconstruction of severely atrophic edentulous maxilla. Therefore, the purpose of the clinical series presented herein was to clinically evaluate long-term horizontal and vertical bone gain, as well as implant survival rate after reconstruction of severely atrophic edentulous maxillary ridges. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixteen patients (mean age: 64.6 ± 14.6 years of age) were consecutively treated for vertical and/or horizontal bone augmentation via GBR in combination with bilateral sinus augmentation utilizing a mixture of autologous and anorganic bovine bone. Implant survival, bone gain, intraoperative/postoperative complications and peri-implant bone loss were calculated up to the last follow-up exam. RESULTS: Overall, 122 dental implants were placed into augmented sites and have been followed from 12 to 180 months (mean: 76.5 months). Implant survival was 100% (satisfactory survival rate of 97.5%). Mean bone gain was 5.6 mm (max: 9 mm; min: 3 mm) While vertical bone gain was 5.1 ± 1.8 mm; horizontal bone gain was 7.0 ± 1.5 mm. No intraoperative/postoperative complications were noted. Mean peri-implant bone loss values were consistent within the standards for implant success (1.4 ± 1.0 mm). At patient-level, only one patient who had three implants presented with severe peri-implant bone loss. CONCLUSION: Complete reconstruction of an atrophied maxilla can be successfully achieved by means of guided bone regeneration for horizontal and/or vertical bone gain including bilateral sinus augmentation using a mixture of anorganic bovine bone and autologous bone.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".