Digital Design of Minimally Invasive Endodontic Access Cavity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New minimally invasive endodontic cavities have been described and proposed to preserve dentin (and enamel) through strategic access, including point endodontic access cavity (PEAC). There is no consensus to what extent PEAC contributes to tooth’s resistance to fracture, because there is no agreement on how PEAC should be performed. The purpose of the present study is to describe and classify four different types of PEACs and to examine if a dynamic navigation system /DNS) could allow planning and precisely executing these cavities in vitro. Forty TrueTooth TM Replica # 3-001 models, were randomly divided into four identical groups of ten and scanned using a cone bean computed tomography (OP-Maxio 300, Instrumentarium-Kavo, Finland). Then, four different access cavities were planned and performed by using DNS (Navident dynamic navigation system, ClaroNav, Toronto, ON, Canada). For each tooth, a different PEAC was designed to obtain endodontic access to the main mesio-buccal canal (MB1), resulting in a different location of the entry point on the occlusal surface of the tooth. Precision was evaluated by comparing deviation in the inclinations between the planned and real cavity. Data were recorded and statistically analyzed. DNS allowed preparation of minimally invasive “straight line” cavities, with some differences in the accuracy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".