MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311574250 · doi:10.1111/cid.13166

Polycaprolactone versus collagen membrane and 1‐year clinical outcomes: A randomized controlled trial

2022· article· en· W4311574250 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thun Kusirisin, Jintamai Suwanprateeb, Borvornwut Buranawat

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersThammasat University
KeywordsBuccal administrationPolycaprolactoneMedicineImplantDentistrySoft tissueDental implantConfidence intervalMembraneCone beam computed tomographyRandomized controlled trialBiomedical engineeringMaterials scienceSurgeryInternal medicineChemistryComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Polycaprolactone (PCL) is a synthetic aliphatic polyester widely used in biomedical applications with biodegradability in the body and promotes cell proliferation and differentiation. A newly developed bilayered PCL membrane was developed for possibly being used as a membrane in guided bone regeneration (GBR). PURPOSE: To compare the clinical efficacy between a newly developed bilayered PCL membrane with a Cytoplast™ RTM collagen membrane for GBR with simultaneous implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients were randomized to PCL or RTM group, and a total of 24 dental implants were placed. Primary outcomes were patient mean buccal bone thickness (BBT) immediately postimplantation and at 6 months using cone-beam CT and soft tissue surface dimensional changes (STC) at crown insertion, 6 months, and 1 year after loading using intraoral scanner. Secondary outcomes included success rate, clinical parameters, healing index, implant stability, pink esthetic score, and marginal bone levels. RESULTS: The percentage of reduced BBT at 6 months was 32.38%, 25.94%, and 23.96% in the test group and 34.42%, 14.75%, and 6.34% in the control group at the corresponding levels. The mean difference of changed BBT associated with PCL membrane, when compared to collagen membrane, at 6 months was -0.02 ± 0.18 mm (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.40 to 0.35), 0.29 ± 0.28 mm (95% CI: -0.29 to 0.87), and 0.62 ± 0.38 mm (95% CI: -0.17 to 1.42) at 0, 2, and 4 mm from implant shoulder. Minimal loss of STC was observed in both groups up to 1 year of loading. The mean difference loss of surface dimensional change associated with PCL membrane, when compared to collagen membrane, at 1 year of loading was 0.31 ± 0.19 mm (95% CI: -0.07 to 0.70), 0.22 ± 0.26 mm (95% CI: -0.33 to 0.76), and 0.17 ± 0.30 mm (95% CI: -0.45 to 0.78) at 0, 2, and 4 mm from implant shoulder. None of these differences were statistically significant (unpaired t-test, degrees of freedom [df] = 22; p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the limits of this trial, both barrier membranes resulted in comparable outcomes for GBR with implant placement after 1 year in function. Further research is necessary with a larger sample size.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207