Varying Influence of Maxillary Sinus Dimensions on New Bone Formation With Various Graft Materials in Lateral Window Sinus Augmentation—A Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Introduction The present study aimed to evaluate and to compare the influence of anatomical variables such as sinus width (SW), inner maxillary sinus contour length (IMSCL), and residual ridge height (RRH) on new bone formation (%NBF) for deproteinized porcine (DPBM) and bovine bone mineral (DBBM) used for lateral window sinus augmentation (LWSA) grafting. Material and Methods For LWSA groups grafted either with DPBM (n = 10) or DBBM (n = 13) a linear‐ as well as a multivariate‐regression analysis was conducted between measured %NBF and radiographically retrospectively assessed anatomical variables (SW/IMSCL/RRH). Correlations as well as regression coefficients (R2) were calculated, evaluating the influence of anatomical variables on %NBF with differentiation between both xenogenic graft materials used. Results With no differences for patient‐epidemiologic data, for anatomical variables as well as for surgical‐ and patient‐related risk factors, comparison between the two LWSA groups was possible. The linear‐regression analysis provided significant correlations between histomorphometrically evaluated %NBF and SW (DPBM: r = −0.660, p = 0.038; DBBM: r = −0.614, p = 0.026) as well as between %NBF and IMSCL (DPBM: r = −0.737; p = 0.015, DBBM: r = −0.573, p = 0.041), but not for RRH. Between SW/IMSCL/RRH and %NBF, regression‐coefficients‐(R2) of 0.435/0.543/0.258 using DPBM and R2 of 0.377/0.328/0.053 using DBBM represented evidently higher influences of anatomical structures when porcine graft material was applied. The multivariate‐regression analysis confirmed the different influence between various xenogenic graft materials on % NBF as well with a pronounced effect for porcine material (DPBM: R2 = 0.591 [59.1%] vs. DBBM: R2 = 0.314 [31.4%]). Conclusion In LWSA, anatomical structures such as SW and IMSCL significantly affect new bone formation, though with varying effects for different xenogenic (porcine vs. bovine) bone mineral graft materials used.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".