MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205290969 · doi:10.1111/cid.13060

Does initial buccal crest thickness affect final buccal crest thickness after flapless immediate implant placement and provisionalization: A prospective cone beam computed tomogram cohort study

2022· article· en· W4205290969 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tristan Staas, Edith Groenendijk, Ewald M. Bronkhorst, Luc Verhamme, Gerry M. Raghoebar, G.J. Meijer

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCone beam computed tomographyBuccal administrationImplantDentistryCrestAlveolar crestProspective cohort studyOrthodonticsComputed tomographySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Flapless immediate implant placement and provisionalization (FIIPP) in the aesthetic zone is still controversial. Especially, an initial buccal crest thickness (BCT) of ≤1 mm is thought to be disruptive for the final buccal crest stability jeopardizing the aesthetic outcome. PURPOSE: To radiographically assess the BCT and buccal crest height (BCH) after 1 year and to calculate the correlation between initial and final achieved BCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective study on FIIPP. Only patients were included in whom one maxillary incisor was considered as lost. In six centers, 100 consecutive patients received FIIPP. Implants were placed in a maximal palatal position of the socket, thereby creating a buccal space of at least 2 mm, which was subsequently filled with a bovine bone substitute. Files of preoperative (T0), peroperative (T1) and 1-year postoperative (T3) cone beam computed tomogram (CBCT) scans were imported into the Maxillim™ software to analyze the changes in BCT-BCH over time. RESULTS: Preoperatively, 85% of the cases showed a BCT ≤1 mm, in 25% of the patients also a small buccal defect (≤5 mm) was present. Mean BCT at the level of the implant-shoulder increased from 0.6 mm at baseline to 3.3 mm immediate postoperatively and compacted to 2.4 mm after 1 year. Mean BCH improved from 0.7 to 3.1 mm peroperatively, and resorbed to 1.7 mm after 1 year. The Pearson correlation of 0.38 between initial and final BCT was significant (p = 0.01) and therefore is valued as moderate. If only patients (75%) with an intact alveolus were included in the analysis, still a "moderate correlation" of 0.32 (p = 0.01) was calculated. CONCLUSIONS: A "moderate correlation" was shown for the hypothesis that "thinner preoperative BCT's deliver thinner BCT's" 1 year after performing FIIPP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.364 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research→Same topicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→