Ridge preservation following tooth extraction using bovine xenograft compared with porcine xenograft: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Abstract

Background The primary purpose of this study was to histologically determine if there is a significant difference in new bone formation, residual graft material, and connective tissue/other when ridge preservation is accomplished using a bovine versus a porcine xenograft. Methods Forty‐four patients needing a single rooted tooth extraction and ridge preservation in preparation for dental implant placement were recruited in the study. After minimally traumatic tooth extraction, alveolar ridge dimensions were measured using a custom‐fabricated acrylic stent. Patients were then randomized 1:1 to receive ridge preservation using either bovine or porcine xenograft material. A trimmed dense polytetrafluoroethylene (d‐PTFE) membrane was overlaid on the graft material, the mucoperiosteal flaps were replaced, and the surgical site was sutured. After 18 to 20 weeks of wound healing, sites were surgically re‐entered, ridge dimensions were again measured using the previously fabricated acrylic stents and a bone core sample of the grafted site was harvested for histomorphometric analysis. Results Thirty eight of the 44 enrolled patients completed the study, 17 from the bovine group and 21 from the porcine group. Histologically, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups for mean percentage of vital bone formation (bovine = 36.21%, porcine = 31.27%, P = 0.49), residual graft material (bovine = 20.47%, porcine = 19.52%, P = 0.82) and connective tissue/other (bovine = 43.32%, porcine = 49.21%, P = 0.19). For secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between the groups for mean change in buccal ridge height, lingual ridge height, and ridge width. However, a higher number of patients in the porcine group had additional grafting at the time of implant placement, either because of thin buccal plate or failure of implant stability. Conclusion The findings suggest that ridge preservation with porcine xenograft results in comparable histomorphometric outcomes and dimensional stability with bovine xenograft.

Alveolar ridge preservation in defect sockets in the maxillary aesthetic zone followed by single-tooth bone level tapered implants with immediate provisionalization: a 1-year prospective case series

“…This was also seen in other studies with alveolar ridge preservation in the aesthetic region. In Zuiderveld et al [30], in 45% of the cases, an extra bone augmentation procedure was needed, and in Lai et al [31], this was the case in 26.3%.…”

Comparison of Clinical Parameters in Dental Implant Therapy between Implant Site Development Using Porcine- and Bovine-Derived Xenografts

“…Bio-Oss ® , physically and chemically like human bone, is the most well-known DBBM from spinal bone in dental application [6,17]. The porous particle size varies from 0.25 to 1.0 mm and the Ca/P ratio is 1.92 [12].…”

“…To the best of our knowledge, a small number of studies have focused on comparing these two different-origin xenografts in the context of implant site development [7,14,17]. Our hypothesis is that no significant differences exist between the clinical parameters of dental implant therapy for application of bovine-and porcine-derived xenografts to implant site development.…”

Clinical and laboratorial outcomes of xenogeneic biomaterials: literature review

“…Lai et al (83) published a study with the goal to compare the histologic and clinical outcomes of ridge preservation using bovine and porcine xenografts in 44 patients. The current findings indicate that there are no significant differences in vital bone formation, residual graft particles, and connective tissue between the groups after 18 to 20 weeks of wound healing.…”