The facial–coronal ridge crest alterations after single immediate implant placement and provisionalization with thin buccal plate phenotype in anterior maxilla: A radiographic case‐series study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To explore the features of and potential landmarks that predict crestal ridge remodeling after immediate implant placement and provisionalization (IIPP) with thin buccal plate phenotype in the anterior maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients requiring IIPP of single maxillary incisor with thin buccal bone plate (<1 mm) were recruited. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), performed before and 6 months after the intervention, were three-dimensionally superimposed. A virtual line connecting the bony emergence points of adjacent teeth was drawn as a reference. The facial-coronal alveolar crest of the extraction socket and healed ridge were located in mesial, middle and distal cross-sectional planes, and linear ridge reductions were measured. The correlation between ridge reduction and local factors was analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included. From the extraction socket to healed ridge, the alveolar crest underwent linear bone reduction of 1.50 ± 0.50, 1.54 ± 0.66 and 1.65 ± 0.73 mm in the mesial, middle, and distal regions in an apical-palatal direction. The middle region had significantly higher horizontal (facial-palatal) but lower vertical (coronal-apical) bone reduction than the mesial and distal areas (P < 0.01). The facial-coronal ridge crest of the healed ridge located close to the reference line. Ridge reduction positively correlated with the distance between the initial facial-coronal crest of the extraction socket and the reference line (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Alveolar crest of the socket lost its curvature and tended to attain a flat profile after IIPP due to inconsistent ridge reduction in middle, mesial and distal areas. The reference line may be a potential landmark for predicting the ridge crest after remodeling.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".