Histomorphometric and micro‐CT analyses of calvarial bone grafts used to reconstruct the extremely atrophied maxilla
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Calvarial bone grafts are successful in the reconstruction of the severely atrophied maxilla as a pre-implant procedure. However, not much is known about graft incorporation at the microscopic level. PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess calvarial bone conversion 4 months after being grafted in the edentulous maxillary bone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 13 patients (age:65.3 ± 8.7 years) the atrophic maxilla was reconstructed with autologous calvarial bone. Biopsies were taken from fresh calvarial bone grafts and from the reconstructed maxillae after 4 months of healing. Micro-CT, histomorphometric, and histological analysis were performed. From three patients biopsies were obtained after 9, 11, or 45 months. RESULTS: The micro-CT analysis revealed that in the maxilla the calvarial bone was well preserved even after 45 months. Histology showed progressive incorporation of grafted bone within a maxillary bone. Osteoid and osteocytes were present in all biopsies indicating new bone formation and vital bone. Histomorphometrically, the percentage of grafted bone volume over total volume decreased from 79.8% (IQR78.7-83.3) in fresh calvarial grafts to 59.3% (IQR44.8-64.6) in healed grafts. The biopsies were taken after 9, 11, and 45 months showed similar values. CONCLUSIONS: Calvarial bone grafts result in stable and viable bone, good incorporation into native maxillary bone, and a minor decrease in bone volume after healing. Consequently, they provide a solid base for implant placement in severely atrophied edentulous maxillary bone.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".