Schneiderian Membrane Elevation up to 8 mm by Transcrestal Technique Using Hollowed Osteotomes: A Human Cadaver Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare the detachment surfaces of Schneiderian membrane elevation of 4-8 mm by transcrestal technique using hollowed osteotomes on human cadavers with 4 mm residual bone height. METHODS: The study followed the CACTUS (ChAracteristics of Cadaver Training and sUrgical Studies) guidelines. Thirty-four heads with maxillary bilateral edentulous posterior zones and type IV bone (a residual bone height of 4 mm) were selected using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. Heads were randomly allocated to a group and both sinuses received the same treatment. A sinus floor elevation was performed on the 68 sites using new hollowed osteotome (C.M.C Tech, IBS Implant, Daejeon, South Korea). Samples were divided into two groups: Group 1: sinus elevation of 4 mm; and Group 2: sinus elevation of 8 mm. A postoperative CBCT was performed to analyze membrane integrity and to assess the membrane detachment in mesiodistal and buccopalatal plane. RESULTS: Of the 68 membrane elevations, only 4 were associated with perforations; 2 occurred in each group. The detachment surface variations between group 1 and group 2 were linear in all directions (Pearson correlation coefficient ρ = 0.99). The Student's t-test unveiled significant differences in detachment surfaces between group 1 and group 2 in all directions (p < 0.001). The ratio of detachment surface group 2/group 1 was homogeneous in all directions (1.5 ≤ r ≤ 1.54). The quality of Schneiderian membrane elevations of 4-8 mm by transcrestal technique was similar using the hollowed osteotomes on human cadavers with 4 mm residual bone height. CONCLUSIONS: In a transcrestal approach using this new-generation osteotome, sinus membrane elevations of 8 mm were performed with a low perforation rate in cadavers. The use of the new hollowed osteotome allowed a Schneiderian membrane elevation of up to 8 mm in a safe and reproducible manner. This transcrestal elevation protocol could increase the indications of the technique, especially concerning single implant restorations and for frail patients with significant medical history for whom a lateral approach would be too invasive.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".