Long‐term stable vertical bone regeneration after sinus floor elevation and simultaneous implant placement with and without grafting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Less invasive surgical approaches to regenerate bone intra-sinus and allow long-term functional implant stability are needed. PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term vertical bone regeneration after sinus floor elevation and simultaneous implant placement with and without bone grafting. METHODS: Vertical bone gains (VBG) post-sinus elevation, with and without grafting, were evaluated in thirty individuals presenting an average residual bone height (RBH) of 4.2 mm using a standardized digital technique. Measurements were taken preoperatively, and at an average of 64.6 months follow-up. Clinically, peri-implant tissues were assessed for pocket formation and presence of inflammation to evaluate established success criteria. RESULTS: Overall, RBH averaged 4.2 ± 1.1 mm (range: 1.8-5.8) and VBG 7.7 ± 1.6 mm (range: 6.0-12.9). Mean difference of 7.6 mm between vertical bone heights (VBH) at augmented implants sites and initial RBH, 11.8 versus 4.2 mm, (P < .0001, CI95%: 6.9-8.2) was statistically significant. RBH averaged 4.5 ± 0.8 mm and 3.8 ± 1.2 (P = .07) and VBG 6.8 ± 0.5 and 8.5 ± 1.9 mm (P = .003, CI95%: 0.6-2.7), for nongrafted and grafted individuals, respectively. The grafting group received an average graft volume of 0.35 ± 0.1 cc (range: 0.25-0.5) per implant site. Long-term follow-ups average 64.6 months (range: 36-144) and all implants met the success criteria. VBG ≥ 7 mm were 7.3 times more likely to develop on grafted sites (OR = 7.3, P = 0.02, CI95%: 1.2-46.2). CONCLUSION: None to negligible amounts of grafting material are required to regenerate substantial amounts of autogenous bone into atrophic sinus cavities after simultaneous implant placement. The regenerated VBH seems stable for functional implant stability long-term. Implant success rates were 100% at an average of 64.6 months.
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) | 0.000 | 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".