Dimensional changes of the maxillary sinus following tooth extraction in the posterior maxilla with and without socket preservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sinus pneumatization is commonly observed following tooth extraction in the posterior maxilla, however, the role of this pneumatization in the overall changes in the vertical bone height is not clear. PURPOSE: To compare dimensional changes in the alveolar ridge and corresponding maxillary sinus following tooth extraction, with or without socket preservation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 42 patients underwent tooth extraction (control group) and 21 patients underwent tooth extraction with socket preservation using DBBM (study group). Panoramic radiographs, prior to and approximately 1 year post extractions were superimposed and matched using a fixed reference unit. The following measurements were performed in the midline of the tooth site: distance of the bone crest to the sinus floor; distance of the sinus floor to the sinus roof and the sagittal circumference of the maxillary. RESULTS: The mean change in the distance from the sinus floor to the sinus roof pre and post operatively was 0.30 mm (±0.10 SE) in the study group and 1.30 mm (±0.27 SE) in the control group (P = .0221). The mean change in the distance from the bone crest to the sinus floor was 0.32 mm (±0.09 SE) in the study group and 1.26 mm (±0.28 SE) in the control group (P = .0019), and the mean change in the sinus sagittal circumference was 37.34 mm (±6.10 SE) and 125.95 mm (±15.60 SE), respectively (P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Ridge preservation using bovine derived xenograft might reduce sinus pneumatization along with minimizing crestal bone resorption.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".