Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Similar(60)
5. Figure 6 In the absence of an epiphyseal bone core or at the beginning of its formation (above), and the risk to develop a transphyseal bone bridge is lower in comparison to a situation where the bone core has developed further.
A bone trephine bur of external diameter 2 mm was used to obtained a bone core from the centers of socket preservation sites at the uncovering surgery (Fig. 3d).
Histological assessment of the quality of bone formation was also carried out with bone cores obtained at the implant placement re-entry in one patient.
Histomorphometric assessment of two bone cores obtained at the time of implant placement from one patient revealed 27.6% new bone and an overall mineralized fraction of 72.3% in the grafted area 4 months after the bone grafting was carried out.
The results showed that the mean volumetric tBMD at both the organ (including the bone marrow spaces) and tissue levels (excluding the bone marrow spaces) were a 49.2% and 28.3%, respectively, lower in the anterior bone cores than in the posterior bone cores from the ultradistal tibia (P < 0.01).
The trend to develop a bone bridge was highest in those animals with the largest epiphyseal bone core and hence the smallest distance between this epiphyseal bone core and the metaphyseal bone (Figure 6).
f Bone core was taken at 3 months after the socket preservation.
A bone core was taken from the center of socket preservation sites and histologic sections were prepared at implant placement (Fig. 1f).
Histological sections were prepared from a bone core biopsy obtained in an oblique direction from the buccal cortex in one patient at the site of subsequent implant placement.
Bone cores were harvested at 8 and 16 weeks, followed by placement of one implant at 8 weeks and the second at 16 weeks.
Bone cores were obtained for histomorphometric assessment at the time of dental implant insertion for 1 patient (Fig. 2a c); the results of which are tabulated in histomorphometric analysis in Table 2.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com