A comparative analysis of particulate bovine bone substitutes for oral regeneration: a narrative review.
Narrative review
Oral regeneration
Particulate bovine bone substitute
Peri-implant defects
Ridge preservation
Sinus floor elevation
Journal
International journal of implant dentistry
ISSN: 2198-4034
Titre abrégé: Int J Implant Dent
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101676532
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 May 2024
27 May 2024
Historique:
received:
15
04
2024
accepted:
21
05
2024
medline:
27
5
2024
pubmed:
27
5
2024
entrez:
27
5
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Particulate bovine bone substitutes (BS) are commonly used in oral regeneration. However, more literature is needed focusing on comparative analyses among various particulate bovine BS. This study evaluates pre-clinical and clinical data of different particulate bovine BS in oral regeneration. A narrative review was conducted by screening the PubMed database Included in the review were pre-clinical and clinical studies until 2024 comparing a minimum of two distinct particulate bovine BS. In addition to examining general data concerning manufacturing and treatment processes, biological safety, physical and chemical characteristics, and graft resorption, particular emphasis was placed on assessing pre-clinical and clinical data related to ridge preservation, sinus floor elevation, peri-implant defects, and various forms of alveolar ridge augmentation utilizing particulate bovine BS. Various treatment temperatures ranging from 300 to 1,250 °C and the employment of chemical cleaning steps were identified for the manufacturing process of particulate bovine BS deemed to possess biosecurity. A notable heterogeneity was observed in the physical and chemical characteristics of particulate bovine BS, with minimal or negligible graft resorption. Variations were evident in particle and pore sizes and the porosity of particulate bovine BS. Pre-clinical assessments noted a marginal inclination towards favorable outcomes for particulate bovine BS subjected to higher treatment temperatures. However, clinical data are insufficient. No distinctions were observed regarding ridge preservation, while slight advantages were noted for high-temperature treated particulate bovine BS in sinus floor elevation. Subtle variances in both pre-clinical and clinical outcomes were observed in across various particulate bovine BS. Due to inadequate data, numerous considerations related to diverse particulate bovine BS, including peri-implant defects, must be more conclusive. Additional clinical studies are imperative to address these knowledge gaps effectively.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38801622
doi: 10.1186/s40729-024-00544-z
pii: 10.1186/s40729-024-00544-z
doi:
Substances chimiques
Bone Substitutes
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
26Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Alghamdi HS, Jansen JA. The development and future of dental implants. Dent Mater J. 2020;39(2):167–72.
pubmed: 31969548
doi: 10.4012/dmj.2019-140
Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Bone Quality and Quantity and Dental Implant failure: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(3):219–37.
pubmed: 28319206
doi: 10.11607/ijp.5142
Poli PP, Beretta M, Cicciù M, Maiorana C. Alveolar ridge augmentation with titanium mesh. A retrospective clinical study. Open Dent J. 2014;8:148–58.
pubmed: 25317209
pmcid: 4192861
doi: 10.2174/1874210601408010148
Hong CE, Lee JY, Choi J, Joo JY. Prediction of the alveolar bone level after the extraction of maxillary anterior teeth with severe periodontitis. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2015;45(6):216–22.
pubmed: 26734492
pmcid: 4698948
doi: 10.5051/jpis.2015.45.6.216
Schropp L, Wenzel A, Kostopoulos L, Karring T. Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent. 2003;23(4):313–23.
Carlsson GE, Bergman B, Hedegard B. Changes in contour of the maxillary alveolar process under immediate dentures. A longitudinal clinical and x-ray cephalometric study covering 5 years. Acta Odontol Scand. 1967;25(1):45–75.
pubmed: 5233859
doi: 10.3109/00016356709072522
Sanz M, Vignoletti F. Key aspects on the use of bone substitutes for bone regeneration of edentulous ridges. Dent Mater. 2015;31(6):640–7.
pubmed: 25882277
doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2015.03.005
Kämmerer P, Buttchereit I, Pabst A. Allogener Knochen - Knochenersatzmaterial oder Ersatz für autologe Transplantate?.
Avila-Ortiz G, Chambrone L, Vignoletti F. Effect of alveolar ridge preservation interventions following tooth extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2019;46(Suppl 21):195–223.
pubmed: 30623987
doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13057
Avila-Ortiz G, Elangovan S, Kramer KW, Blanchette D, Dawson DV. Effect of alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2014;93(10):950–8.
pubmed: 24966231
pmcid: 4293706
doi: 10.1177/0022034514541127
Kämmerer PW, Al-Nawas B. Bone reconstruction of extensive maxillomandibular defects in adults. Periodontol 2000. 2023;93(1):340–57.
pubmed: 37650475
doi: 10.1111/prd.12499
Dau M, Kämmerer PW. Kurze Implantate vs. Augmentation Der Junge Zahnarzt. 2017;2:15–24.
Torres-Alemany A, Fernández-Estevan L, Agustín-Panadero R, Montiel-Company JM, Labaig-Rueda C, Mañes-Ferrer JF. Clinical behavior of short Dental implants: systematic review and Meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2020;9(10).
Sohrabi K, Mushantat A, Esfandiari S, Feine J. How successful are small-diameter implants? A literature review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(5):515–25.
pubmed: 22313216
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02410.x
Ladha K, Sharma A, Tiwari B, Bukya DN. Bone augmentation as an adjunct to dental implant rehabilitation in patients with diabetes mellitus: a review of literature. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2017;8(2):95–101.
pubmed: 29386810
pmcid: 5773998
doi: 10.4103/njms.NJMS_16_17
Baldini N, De Sanctis M, Ferrari M. Deproteinized bovine bone in periodontal and implant surgery. Dent Mater. 2011;27(1):61–70.
pubmed: 21112618
doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.017
Chavda S, Levin L. Human studies of Vertical and Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Augmentation comparing different types of bone graft materials: a systematic review. J Oral Implantol. 2018;44(1):74–84.
pubmed: 29135351
doi: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-17-00053
Kloss FR, Offermanns V, Kloss-Brandstätter A. Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects-A 12-month retrospective radiographic evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(11):1163–75.
pubmed: 30303581
pmcid: 6282851
doi: 10.1111/clr.13380
Silva FM, Cortez AL, Moreira RW, Mazzonetto R. Complications of intraoral donor site for bone grafting prior to implant placement. Implant Dent. 2006;15(4):420–6.
pubmed: 17172961
doi: 10.1097/01.id.0000246225.51298.67
Kämmerer PW, Heimes D, Hartmann A, Kesting M, Khoury F, Schiegnitz E et al. Clinical insights into traumatic Injury of the Inferior Alveolar and Ligual nerves: a Comprehensive Approach from diagnosis to therapeutic interventions. Clin Oral Invest. 2024.
Heimes D, Pabst A, Becker P, Hartmann A, Kloss F, Tunkel J, et al. Comparison of morbidity-related parameters between autologous and allogeneic bone grafts for alveolar ridge augmentation from patients’ perspective – a questionnaire-based cohort study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024;26(1):170–82.
pubmed: 37438839
doi: 10.1111/cid.13242
Troeltzsch M, Troeltzsch M, Kauffmann P, Gruber R, Brockmeyer P, Moser N, et al. Clinical efficacy of grafting materials in alveolar ridge augmentation: a systematic review. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(10):1618–29.
pubmed: 27622971
doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.07.028
Qian SJ, Mo JJ, Si MS, Qiao SC, Shi JY, Lai HC. Long-term outcomes of osteotome sinus floor elevation with or without bone grafting: the 10-year results of a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2020;47(8):1016–25.
pubmed: 31976567
doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13260
Urban IA, Ravidà A, Saleh MHA, Galli M, Lozada J, Farkasdi S, et al. Long-term crestal bone changes in implants placed in augmented sinuses with minimal or moderate remaining alveolar bone: a 10-year retrospective case-series study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021;32(1):60–74.
pubmed: 33222302
doi: 10.1111/clr.13680
Campana V, Milano G, Pagano E, Barba M, Cicione C, Salonna G, et al. Bone substitutes in orthopaedic surgery: from basic science to clinical practice. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2014;25(10):2445–61.
pubmed: 24865980
pmcid: 4169585
doi: 10.1007/s10856-014-5240-2
Blatt S, Thiem DGE, Kyyak S, Pabst A, Al-Nawas B, Kämmerer PW. Possible implications for Improved Osteogenesis? The combination of platelet-rich fibrin with different bone substitute materials. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9:640053.
pubmed: 33816452
pmcid: 8010662
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.640053
Kämmerer PW, Schiegnitz E, Alshihri A, Draenert FG, Wagner W. Modification of xenogenic bone substitute materials–effects on the early healing cascade in vitro. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(7):852–8.
pubmed: 23551638
doi: 10.1111/clr.12153
Kyyak S, Blatt S, Pabst A, Thiem D, Al-Nawas B, Kämmerer PW. Combination of an allogenic and a xenogenic bone substitute material with injectable platelet-rich fibrin - A comparative in vitro study. J Biomater Appl. 2020;35(1):83–96.
pubmed: 32237950
doi: 10.1177/0885328220914407
Kyyak S, Blatt S, Schiegnitz E, Heimes D, Staedt H, Thiem DGE, et al. Activation of human osteoblasts via different bovine bone substitute materials with and without Injectable platelet Rich Fibrin in vitro. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9:599224.
pubmed: 33681155
pmcid: 7925396
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.599224
Kyyak S, Pabst A, Heimes D, Kämmerer PW. The influence of Hyaluronic Acid Biofunctionalization of a bovine bone substitute on osteoblast activity in Vitro. Mater (Basel). 2021;14(11).
Schorn L, Fienitz T, De Donno F, Sterner-Kock A, Maul AC, Holtmann H, et al. Critical-size defect augmentation using sintered and non-sintered bovine bone matrix - an experimental controlled study in Minipigs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;79(9):1866–73.
pubmed: 34051155
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2021.03.025
Song YW, Jung HJ, An YZ, Jung UW, Lee JS. Addition of autogenous bone chips to deproteinized bovine bone mineral does not have additional benefit in lateral ridge augmentation-A preclinical in vivo experimental study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021;32(9):1105–14.
pubmed: 34219293
doi: 10.1111/clr.13805
Al-Nawas B, Schiegnitz E. Augmentation procedures using bone substitute materials or autogenous bone - a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7(Suppl 2):S219–34.
pubmed: 24977257
Barootchi S, Tavelli L, Majzoub J, Stefanini M, Wang HL, Avila-Ortiz G. Alveolar ridge preservation: complications and cost-effectiveness. Periodontol 2000. 2023;92(1):235–62.
pubmed: 36580417
doi: 10.1111/prd.12469
Mardas N, Macbeth N, Donos N, Jung RE, Zuercher AN. Is alveolar ridge preservation an overtreatment? Periodontol 2000. 2023;93(1):289–308.
Klein MO, Kämmerer PW, Götz H, Duschner H, Wagner W. Long-term bony integration and resorption kinetics of a xenogeneic bone substitute after sinus floor augmentation: histomorphometric analyses of human biopsy specimens. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent. 2013;33(4):e101–10.
doi: 10.11607/prd.1469
Benke D, Olah A, Möhler H. Protein-chemical analysis of Bio-oss bone substitute and evidence on its carbonate content. Biomaterials. 2001;22(9):1005–12.
pubmed: 11311004
doi: 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00323-9
Miron RJ, Sculean A, Cochran DL, Froum S, Zucchelli G, Nemcovsky C, et al. Twenty years of enamel matrix derivative: the past, the present and the future. J Clin Periodontol. 2016;43(8):668–83.
pubmed: 26987551
doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12546
Pardiñas López S, Froum S, Khouly I. Histomorphometric analysis of a Biopsy harvested 10 years after maxillary sinus augmentation with anorganic bovine bone matrix and plasma Rich in Growth factors: a Case Report. Implant Dent. 2015;24(4):480–6.
pubmed: 26068321
Mahesh L, Mascarenhas G, Bhasin MT, Guirado C, Juneja S. Histological evaluation of two different anorganic bovine bone matrixes in lateral wall sinus elevation procedure: a retrospective study. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2020;11(2):258–62.
pubmed: 33897191
pmcid: 8051657
doi: 10.4103/njms.NJMS_81_19
Amid R, Kheiri A, Kheiri L, Kadkhodazadeh M, Ekhlasmandkermani M. Structural and chemical features of xenograft bone substitutes: a systematic review of in vitro studies. Biotechnol Appl Biochem. 2021;68(6):1432–52.
pubmed: 33135215
Barbeck M, Udeabor S, Lorenz J, Schlee M, Holthaus MG, Raetscho N, et al. High-temperature sintering of Xenogeneic Bone substitutes leads to increased Multinucleated Giant cell formation: in vivo and preliminary clinical results. J Oral Implantol. 2015;41(5):e212–22.
pubmed: 25105868
doi: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-14-00168
Peric Kacarevic Z, Kavehei F, Houshmand A, Franke J, Smeets R, Rimashevskiy D, et al. Purification processes of xenogeneic bone substitutes and their impact on tissue reactions and regeneration. Int J Artif Organs. 2018;41(11):789–800.
pubmed: 29707988
doi: 10.1177/0391398818771530
Barbeck M, Dard M, Kokkinopoulou M, Markl J, Booms P, Sader RA, et al. Small-sized granules of biphasic bone substitutes support fast implant bed vascularization. Biomatter. 2015;5:e1056943.
pubmed: 26083163
pmcid: 4581126
doi: 10.1080/21592535.2015.1056943
Wenz B, Oesch B, Horst M. Analysis of the risk of transmitting bovine spongiform encephalopathy through bone grafts derived from bovine bone. Biomaterials. 2001;22(12):1599–606.
pubmed: 11374460
doi: 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00312-4
Kapogianni E, Barbeck M, Jung O, Arslan A, Kuhnel L, Xiong X, et al. Comparison of material-mediated bone regeneration capacities of Sintered and non-sintered xenogeneic bone substitutes via 2D and 3D data. Vivo. 2019;33(6):2169–79.
doi: 10.21873/invivo.11719
22442-1 EI. EU-guidelines for medical devices utilizing animal tissues their derivatives – part 1: application of risk management. 2015.
Taylor DM, Fraser H, McConnell I, Brown DA, Brown KL, Lamza KA, et al. Decontamination studies with the agents of bovine spongiform encephalopathy and scrapie. Arch Virol. 1994;139(3–4):313–26.
pubmed: 7832638
doi: 10.1007/BF01310794
Walker AS, Inderlied CB, Kingsbury DT. Conditions for the chemical and physical inactivation of the K. Fu. Strain of the agent of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Am J Public Health. 1983;73(6):661–5.
pubmed: 6342430
pmcid: 1650862
doi: 10.2105/AJPH.73.6.661
Schwartz Z, Weesner T, van Dijk S, Cochran DL, Mellonig JT, Lohmann CH, et al. Ability of deproteinized cancellous bovine bone to induce new bone formation. J Periodontol. 2000;71(8):1258–69.
pubmed: 10972641
doi: 10.1902/jop.2000.71.8.1258
Tadic D, Epple M. A thorough physicochemical characterisation of 14 calcium phosphate-based bone substitution materials in comparison to natural bone. Biomaterials. 2004;25(6):987–94.
pubmed: 14615163
doi: 10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00621-5
Kim Y, Nowzari H, Rich SK. Risk of prion disease transmission through bovine-derived bone substitutes: a systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013;15(5):645–53.
pubmed: 22171533
doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00407.x
Berberi A, Samarani A, Nader N, Noujeim Z, Dagher M, Kanj W, et al. Physicochemical characteristics of bone substitutes used in oral surgery in comparison to autogenous bone. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:320790.
pubmed: 25143936
pmcid: 4119630
doi: 10.1155/2014/320790
Barbeck M, Booms P, Unger R, Hoffmann V, Sader R, Kirkpatrick CJ, et al. Multinucleated giant cells in the implant bed of bone substitutes are foreign body giant cells-new insights into the material-mediated healing process. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2017;105(4):1105–11.
pubmed: 28093892
doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.36006
Weibrich G, Trettin R, Gnoth SH, Götz H, Duschner H, Wagner W. [Determining the size of the specific surface of bone substitutes with gas adsorption]. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2000;4(3):148–52.
pubmed: 10900957
doi: 10.1007/s100060050187
Trajkovski B, Jaunich M, Müller WD, Beuer F, Zafiropoulos GG, Houshmand A, Hydrophilicity. Viscoelastic, and Physicochemical Properties Variations in Dental Bone Grafting substitutes. Mater (Basel). 2018;11(2).
Riachi F, Naaman N, Tabarani C, Aboelsaad N, Aboushelib MN, Berberi A, et al. Influence of material properties on rate of resorption of two bone graft materials after sinus lift using radiographic assessment. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:737262.
pubmed: 22899930
pmcid: 3415107
doi: 10.1155/2012/737262
Sartori S, Silvestri M, Forni F, Icaro Cornaglia A, Tesei P, Cattaneo V. Ten-year follow-up in a maxillary sinus augmentation using anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss). A case report with histomorphometric evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003;14(3):369–72.
pubmed: 12755788
doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.140316.x
Tadjoedin ES, de Lange GL, Bronckers AL, Lyaruu DM, Burger EH. Deproteinized cancellous bovine bone (Bio-Oss) as bone substitute for sinus floor elevation. A retrospective, histomorphometrical study of five cases. J Clin Periodontol. 2003;30(3):261–70.
pubmed: 12631185
doi: 10.1034/j.1600-051X.2003.01099.x
Piattelli M, Favero GA, Scarano A, Orsini G, Piattelli A. Bone reactions to anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss) used in sinus augmentation procedures: a histologic long-term report of 20 cases in humans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999;14(6):835–40.
pubmed: 10612920
Tawil G, Barbeck M, Unger R, Tawil P, Witte F. Sinus floor elevation using the lateral Approach and Window Repositioning and a xenogeneic bone substitute as a Grafting Material: a histologic, histomorphometric, and Radiographic Analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018;33(5):1089–96.
pubmed: 29894551
doi: 10.11607/jomi.6226
Panagiotou D, Ozkan Karaca E, Dirikan Ipci S, Cakar G, Olgac V, Yilmaz S. Comparison of two different xenografts in bilateral sinus augmentation: radiographic and histologic findings. Quintessence Int. 2015;46(7):611–9.
pubmed: 25699296
Catros S, Sandgren R, Pippenger BE, Fricain JC, Herber V, El Chaar E. A Novel Xenograft Bone Substitute supports stable bone formation in Circumferential defects around Dental implants in Minipigs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2020;35(6):1122–31.
pubmed: 33270052
doi: 10.11607/jomi.8265
Kübler A, Neugebauer J, Oh JH, Scheer M, Zöller JE. Growth and proliferation of human osteoblasts on different bone graft substitutes: an in vitro study. Implant Dent. 2004;13(2):171–9.
pubmed: 15179094
doi: 10.1097/01.ID.0000127522.14067.11
Xu AT, Qi WT, Lin MN, Zhu YH, He FM. The optimization of sintering treatment on bovine-derived bone grafts for bone regeneration: in vitro and in vivo evaluation. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2020;108(1):272–81.
pubmed: 31013400
doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.34387
Ortiz-Puigpelat O, Simões A, Caballé-Serrano J, Hernández-Alfaro F. Blood absorption capacity of different xenograft bone substitutes. An in-vitro study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2019;11(11):e1018–24.
pubmed: 31700576
pmcid: 6825731
Daculsi G, Corre P, Malard O, Legeros R. Performance of bone ingrowth of biphasic calcium phosphate ceramic versus bovine bone substitute. Key Eng Mat. 2006;18:1379–82.
doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.309-311.1379
Manfro R, Fonseca FS, Bortoluzzi MC, Sendyk WR. Comparative, histological and histomorphometric analysis of three anorganic bovine xenogenous bone Substitutes: Bio-oss, Bone-Fill and Gen-Ox Anorganic. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2014;13(4):464–70.
pubmed: 26225012
doi: 10.1007/s12663-013-0554-z
Theodoro LH, Campista CCC, Bury LL, de Souza RGB, Muniz YS, Longo M, et al. Comparison of different bone substitutes in the repair of rat calvaria critical size defects: questioning the need for alveolar ridge presentation. Quintessence Int. 2024;0(0):0.
pubmed: 38726760
Gil LF, Nayak VV, Benalcázar Jalkh EB, Tovar N, Chiu KJ, Salas JC, et al. Laddec® versus Bio-Oss®: the effect on the healing of critical-sized defect - calvaria rabbit model. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2022;110(12):2744–50.
pubmed: 35857711
doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.35125
Gomez J, Bergamo ET, Tovar N, Talib HS, Pippenger BE, Herdia V, et al. Microtomographic reconstruction of mandibular defects treated with xenografts and collagen-based membranes: a pre-clinical minipig model. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2021;26(6):e825–33.
pubmed: 34564687
pmcid: 8601645
doi: 10.4317/medoral.24811
Ferreira Balan V, Botticelli D, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Masuda K, Pires Godoy E, Xavier SP. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with two different inorganic bovine bone grafts: an experimental study in rabbits. Chin J Dent Res. 2022;25(2):93–105.
pubmed: 35686589
Kim DM, Hong H, Lin JC, Nevins M. Evaluation of the bone-regenerating effects of two anorganic bovine bone grafts in a critical-sized Alveolar Ridge defect model. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent. 2017;37(4):e234–44.
doi: 10.11607/prd.3305
Lee D, Lee Y, Kim S, Lee JT, Ahn JS. Evaluation of regeneration after the application of 2 types of deproteinized bovine bone mineral to alveolar bone defects in adult dogs. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2022;52(5):370–82.
pubmed: 36302644
pmcid: 9614180
doi: 10.5051/jpis.2106080304
Sivolella S, Botticelli D, Prasad S, Ricci S, Bressan E, Prasad H. Evaluation and comparison of histologic changes and implant survival in extraction sites immediately grafted with two different xenografts: a randomized clinical pilot study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020;31(9):825–35.
pubmed: 32559003
doi: 10.1111/clr.13626
Barone A, Todisco M, Ludovichetti M, Gualini F, Aggstaller H, Torrés-Lagares D, et al. A prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter evaluation of extraction socket preservation comparing two bovine xenografts: clinical and histologic outcomes. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent. 2013;33(6):795–802.
doi: 10.11607/prd.1690
Shakibaie B, Blatz MB, Sabri H, Jamnani ED, Barootchi S. Effectiveness of two differently processed bovine-derived xenografts for Alveolar Ridge Preservation with a minimally invasive tooth extraction Approach: a feasibility clinical trial. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent. 2023;43(5):540–9.
doi: 10.11607/prd.6128
da Silva HF, Goulart DR, Sverzut AT, Olate S, de Moraes M. Comparison of two anorganic bovine bone in maxillary sinus lift: a split-mouth study with clinical, radiographical, and histomorphometrical analysis. Int J Implant Dent. 2020;6(1):17.
pubmed: 32372226
pmcid: 7200963
doi: 10.1186/s40729-020-00214-w
Moon JW, Sohn DS, Heo JU, Kim JS. Comparison of two kinds of bovine bone in maxillary sinus augmentation: a histomorphometric study. Implant Dent. 2015;24(1):19–24.
pubmed: 25621547
doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000187
Fienitz T, Moses O, Klemm C, Happe A, Ferrari D, Kreppel M, et al. Histological and radiological evaluation of sintered and non-sintered deproteinized bovine bone substitute materials in sinus augmentation procedures. A prospective, randomized-controlled, clinical multicenter study. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(3):787–94.
pubmed: 27129584
doi: 10.1007/s00784-016-1829-9
Pang KM, Lee JK, Choi SH, Kim YK, Kim BJ, Lee JH. Maxillary sinus augmentation with calcium phosphate double-coated anorganic bovine bone: comparative Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial with histological and radiographic evaluation. Implant Dent. 2019;28(1):39–45.
pubmed: 30570584
doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000844
Canellas J, Drugos L, Ritto FG, Fischer RG, Medeiros PJD. Xenograft materials in maxillary sinus floor elevation surgery: a systematic review with network meta-analyses. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;59(7):742–51.
pubmed: 34120778
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2021.02.009
Calasans-Maia MD, Mourão CF, Alves AT, Sartoretto SC, de Uzeda MJ, Granjeiro JM. Maxillary sinus augmentation with a New Xenograft: a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(Suppl 2):e586–93.
pubmed: 25535980
Cinar IC, Zboun M, Gultekin BA, Saglanmak A, Akay AS. Retrospective analysis of three different xenografts in maxillary sinus augmentation: histologic and three-dimensional radiologic study. Quintessence Int. 2023;54(8):640–9.
pubmed: 37288651
Hieu PD, Chung JH, Yim SB, Hong KS. A radiographical study on the changes in height of grafting materials after sinus lift: a comparison between two types of xenogenic materials. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2010;40(1):25–32.
pubmed: 20498756
pmcid: 2872804
doi: 10.5051/jpis.2010.40.1.25
Polymeri A, Anssari-Moin D, van der Horst J, Wismeijer D, Laine ML, Loos BG. Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis defects with two different xenograft granules: a randomized clinical pilot study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020;31(11):1047–60.
pubmed: 32803798
pmcid: 7693249
doi: 10.1111/clr.13651
Lim J, Jun SH, Tallarico M, Park JB, Park DH, Hwang KG et al. A randomized controlled trial of guided bone regeneration for Peri-implant Dehiscence defects with two anorganic bovine bone materials covered by Titanium Meshes. Mater (Basel). 2022;15(15).