Evaluation of immediate cell viability and repair of osteotomies for implants using drills and piezosurgery. A randomized, prospective, and controlled rabbit study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the immediate bone damage and bone repair after osteotomy for implants using conventional drills and drills powered by piezoelectric motor. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve rabbits received a tibial osteotomy with a conventional drill (control), with a diamond like carbon drill (DLC) and with a piezoelectric drill (Piezo). The animals were euthanized immediately, 30 and 60 days postoperatively. The tibias were removed and analyzed by means of histomorphometry, immunohistochemistry and microtomography. RESULTS: The immediate damage to the tissue at the cavity margins was similar (P > .05). At 30 and 60 days, the amount of newly formed bone tissue was similar (P > .05). Osteocalcin was intense score at 60 days in Piezo group. Microtomography revealed that bone volume at 30 days (control 3.8; DLC 4.3; and Piezo 2.4) and 60 days (control 4.9; DLC 4.82; and Piezo 3.95) were similar. There was a significant difference in bone formation between 30 (2.4) and 60 days (3.95) for the Piezo group (P = .016). CONCLUSION: The immediate effects and repair of cavities made using conventional, DLC coated, or ultrasound drills were similar.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".