MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4315621280 · doi:10.1111/cid.13179

Deproteinized bovine bone and freeze‐dried bone allograft in sinus floor augmentation: A randomized controlled trial

2023· article· en· W4315621280 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Isaya Kungvarnchaikul, Keskanya Subbalekha, Pimrumpai Rochanakit Sindhavajiva, Jaijam Suwanwela

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFaculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn UniversityChulalongkorn University
KeywordsMedicineDentistryRandomized controlled trialSinus (botany)SurgeryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of deproteinized bovine bone (DBB, Bio-Oss®) and freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA, SureOss®) on bone healing during maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) using histology, immunohistochemistry, and gene expressions of the marker genes including Runx2, Opn, Ocn, Col1a1, Rankl, and Tnf-α. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen participants who required two-stage maxillary sinus augmentation were randomly assigned to DBB and FDBA bone grafting groups. Six months after the sinus augmentation procedure, bone samples were collected before implant placement with a trephine bur. Gene expression of Runx2, Opn, Ocn, Col1a1, Rankl, and Tnf-α of the bone samples was assessed by real-time polymerase chain reaction as a primary outcome. Histological analysis of H&E-stained sections, immunohistochemistry for OPN quantification, and CBCT-based bone tissue examination were performed to investigate the bone healing effects of DBB and FDBA substitutes. RESULTS: The FDBA treated group showed higher gene expression when compared with the DBB treated group in Opn (2.83 ± 1.23 vs. 1.40 ± 0.69; p = 0.04), Runx2 (1.49 ± 0.44 vs. 0.67 ± 0.14; p = 0.01), and Rankl (2.34 ± 0.85 vs. 0.69 ± 0.39; p = 0.03). In the DBB treated group a downregulated expression was found of Ocn relative to maxillary edentulous bone (1.18 ± 0.40 vs. 2.51 ± 0.78; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Two-stage maxillary sinus augmentation with FDBA upregulated specific bone remodeling genes when compared to DBB. The outcome of gene expression matched with the ones for OPN immunoreactivity, being higher in the FDBA group. FDBA had an expression pattern similar to native bone and showed stronger expression of bone forming related-genes suggesting it may be clinically preferable over DBB. This clinical trial was not registered prior to participant recruitment and randomization (clinical registration number TCTR20221217002).

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)0.002
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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