MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503611452 · doi:10.1111/cid.12430

Randomized Clinical Trial of Maxillary Sinus Grafting using Deproteinized Porcine and Bovine Bone Mineral

2016· article· en· W2503611452 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jung‐Seok Lee, Hyun‐Ki Shin, Jeong‐Ho Yun, Kyoo‐Sung Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaxillary sinusMedicineDentistryBone graftingTrephineRadiographySinus (botany)BiopsyOsteotomyRandomized controlled trialNuclear medicineSurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Deproteinized porcine bone mineral (DPBM) was recently developed and commercially available in maxillary sinus grafting, in which demineralized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) was widely used. OBJECTIVES: The present randomized controlled clinical trial aimed to compare histological bone quality and radiographic volume stability in maxillary sinuses grafted with DPBM and DBBM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty sinuses in 16 participants were enrolled and randomly allocated to control and test groups using sequentially numbered, sealed envelopes; laterally approached sinus grafting with DBBM and DPBM, respectively. All participants were blinded to the group assignment during the entire experiment. After standardized osteotomy at the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus, the sinus membrane was elevated, and the control or test biomaterial was grafted. Computed tomography (CT) images were taken immediately after surgery, and another CT and trephine biopsy was taken for radiographic and histological analyses after 6 months. The histological bone quality was measured as a primary outcome, and changes in the height and volume of the graft were evaluated in the reconstructed CT images as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Fifteen sites (7 and 8 sites for control and test group) in 11 participants were finally included in the per protocol (PP) analysis, and 16 sites (7 and 9 sites, respectively) in 12 participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis; there were four drop-outs and one minor protocol violation. In both statistical analyses, the test groups showed comparable new bone formation and residual biomaterials in histology, and both groups exhibited minimal volume/height changes in radiographies. However, smaller sizes of residual biomaterials were observed in the histological samples from the test compared to control sites, despite the use of the same sizes of both biomaterials. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that DPBM might produce comparable bone formation and volumetric stability with DBBM in maxillary sinus grafting, however, further clinical study with longer-term periods and larger sample sizes should be needed for confirming this suggestion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations59
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207