Prospective evaluation of morbidity in patients who underwent autogenous bone‐graft harvesting from the mandibular symphysis and retromolar regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autogenous bone grafts are the most favorable and predictable types of bone graft due to their osteogenic, osteoinductive, and osteoconductive properties. The advantages of harvesting from mandibular bone are that it requires only local anesthesia, is less invasive, has less morbidity, and avoids harvesting from distant sites, thus making it the best choice for maxillary bone reconstruction. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) neurosensory disturbances after autogenous bone graft harvesting from the mandibular symphysis and retromolar region to reconstruct maxillary sinus height for posterior dental implant placement and the effect of these disturbances on patient satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four patients were invited to participate in this study. Autogenous bone graft was harvested from the mandibular symphysis and retromolar regions. After the procedure, the patients were evaluated by means of an adapted questionnaire to determine if they had complaints of neurosensory disturbances at the following time intervals: immediately, 1, 2-5, 6, 7-11, and 12 months postsurgery. RESULTS: Immediately after surgery, 28 patients described sensory changes and 25 reported paresthesia of inferior lip. Only three patients reported pain, and one patient experienced dental hypersensitivity after the surgical procedure. During the evaluation period, the patients reported a decrease in paresthesia and a return of sensation to areas innervated by the IAN. After 12 months, five patients still reported paresthesia of areas innervated by the IAN. Beside this, patients reported significant clinical improvement from the beginning of the evaluation, as 49 patients were satisfied with their treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: Harvesting bone grafts from the mandibular symphysis results in greater postoperative morbidity upon immediate evaluation compared with bone graft harvesting from the retromolar region. Nevertheless, during clinical follow-up, the results of both treatments showed that sensation was eventually recovered, depending on the healing period.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".