Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Cure My Disease

Don't miss your cure!

 Log in / Sign up

Porcine vs. bovine bone grafts: which is better for dental implants?

NCT ID NCT07182929

Knowledge-focused Sponsor: Guoli Yang Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed This study
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Jun 26, 2026 · Last updated Jun 26, 2026

Summary

This study looked at 56 people who had sinus lift surgery to prepare for dental implants. Half received a graft made from porcine (pig) bone, and the other half received a graft from bovine (cow) bone. Researchers used CT scans to compare how well each material held up over 6 months. The goal was to see if the porcine graft resorbs more than the bovine graft and whether both lead to similar bone quality for implant success.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
Deproteinized porcine bone mineral (DPBM) vs. deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM)
What this could lead to
If DPBM works as well as DBBM, it could give dentists another safe option for bone grafting in sinus lift procedures.
What could go wrong
This is a small, retrospective study that only looks at X-ray images, not actual patient outcomes. The results may not apply to everyone, and longer-term studies are needed.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Participants

56 people

The number who actually took part.

Started

Jan 2024

Finished

Jul 2025

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Who is studied

Patients who received LSFA with simultaneous implant placement from June 2022 to June 2024 at the Stomatology Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, were screened for eligibility. All patients underwent preoperative clinical, radiographic examinations and laboratory tests. Eligible patients subsequently received LSFA performed by experienced implant surgeons following the standardized surgical protocol.

Ages

18 to 80 years

Sex

Anyone

Healthy volunteers

Not accepted

This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: 1. Aged between 18 and 80 years; 2. Single or multiple missing teeth in the posterior maxilla with a healing period of at least 3 months; 3. Complete baseline data and surgical records; 4. Underwent LSFA with simultaneous placement of a single implant, grafted exclusively with either DBBM (Bio-Oss®, 0.25-1.0 mm, Geistlich Pharma AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) or DPBM (THE Graft®, 0.25-1.0 mm, Purgo Biologics, Seoul, Korea); 5. Available CBCT images obtained preoperatively (T0), immediately postoperatively (T1), and at 6 months postoperatively (T2); 6. RBH ≤6 mm shown by CBCT at T0 at the edentulous site; 7. No systemic disease, untreated periapical pathology or active periodontitis; 8. Provision of written informed consent for the implant surgery by the patient or their legal guardian. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Uncontrolled systemic diseases or any bone-metabolism diseases; 2. Pregnancy or lactation; 3. Head and neck radiation therapy within the past 5 years; 4. acute and chronic inflammation in the maxillary sinus; 5. Additional vertical or horizontal bone augmentation procedures besides LSFA; 6. Use of graft materials other than the specified DBBM or DPBM, or use of composite grafts; 7. Heavy smoking (≥20 cigarettes/day), alcohol abuse, or history of substance abuse; 8. Placement of multiple implants in the same grafted site (excluded to avoid within-patient confounding).

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Sinus floor augmentation are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Sinus floor augmentation Sinus floor elevation

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • The Affiliated Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University., Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310000

    Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310000, China

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.