Sinus floor augmentation using crestal approach in conjunction with hydroxyapatite/cross‐linked collagen sponge: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Different biomaterials were suggested for sinus floor augmentation (SFA). Recently, new materials were launched showing true bone formation without remnants. PURPOSE: The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate an hydroxyapatite-based, sugar cross-linked collagen sponge (OSSIX™ Bone) in transcrestal SFA (t-SFA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients with edentulous posterior maxilla and residual bone height (RBH) >4 mm underwent t-SFA with OSSIX™ Bone as grafting material and simultaneous implant placement. The implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) was measured by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) directly after implant insertion and at 6 months. Differences in bone height (BH) and volume were determined in CBCT and x-rays at baseline versus 1 year of follow-up. Graft volume was evaluated by tridimensional reconstructions. Linear regression analysis was used to evaluate the effect of bucco-palatal sinus dimension, RBH, and length of the implant protruding (PIL) into the sinus, on the graft height (GH) changes up to 1 year, and on the graft volume at 1 year. Autocorrelation between time lag and augmented bone volume was evaluated through time series analysis correlograms. Health-related quality-of-life outcomes were captured. RESULTS: . The mean GH, measured in the immediate post-operative period, at 6 and 12 months respectively, was 7.24 mm ±1.94; 6.57 mm ± 2.30; 5.46 mm ± 2.04. The mean ISQ measured after the implant placement was 62.19 ± 8.09, and 6 months later was 76.91 ± 4.50. There was a significant correlation between buccolingual dimension and graft volume at 1 year. Neither buccolingual volume nor RBH had a significant effect on GH change, while the PIL showed a significant positive correlation (P = 0.02 and P = 0.03 at 6 and 12 months, respectively). The correlograms indicated no significant correlation, meaning that there is no tendency for graft volume to increase or decrease over time, therefore suggesting graft stability, at least up to one year of follow-up. 86% of patients had no chewing interference. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the study, OSSIX™ Bone could be considered a valid material for SFA due to its manageability and its positive results in promoting new bone formation with long-term stability. T-SFA is confirmed as a less invasive and less painful method.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".