Autogenous DDM versus Bio‐Oss granules in GBR for immediate implantation in periodontal postextraction sites: A prospective clinical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Demineralized dentin matrix (DDM) from the patient's own extracted healthy tooth can be recycled as an autogenous biomaterial for reconstructive dentistry. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of autogenous DDM versus Bio-Oss granules in guided bone regeneration (GBR) for immediate implantation in periodontal postextraction sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November 2015 to March 2017, patients referred to the Foshan Stomatology Hospital, who had been diagnosed with severe periodontitis of the posterior mandibular tooth and agreed to dental implant treatment, were consecutively included. The patients were randomly allocated to the DDM group, treated with immediate implantation + GBR with autogenous DDM granules from the extracted tooth, or the BIO group, treated with immediate implantation + GBR with Bio-Oss granules. The implant stability and marginal bone resorption were measured immediately, at 6 and 18 months after surgery. RESULTS: Forty patients (45 implants) were included. Except 2 cases with wound infection, 43 implants did not have postoperative complications and achieved a satisfactory outcome after 1-year prosthetic loading. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in implant stability quotient values and marginal bone resorption. CONCLUSION: The autogenous DDM granules prepared at the chairside after extractions could act as an excellent readily available alternative to bone graft material in GBR, even for implantation of severe periodontitis cases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".