PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 15, 2026Clinical Oral Investigations1 citationsOpen Access

Partially demineralized allogeneic cancellous bone plug versus deproteinized bovine bone mineral for guided bone regeneration: a pilot randomized controlled clinical trial

SRSiqi RaoJZJ ZhouWNWei Niu

Key Points

  • This trial aims to compare the effectiveness of partially demineralized allogeneic cancellous bone plug (ACBP) versus deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) for guided bone regeneration.
  • Prospective randomized controlled clinical trial with 25 participants requiring GBR.
  • Participants received either ACBP (n = 12) or DBBM (n = 13) with collagen membrane coverage.
  • CBCT scans assessed bone height and ridge dimensions at baseline and 6 months; histomorphometric analysis of bone was also performed.
  • Both groups had similar vital bone percentages at 6 months (ACBP: 38.84% vs. DBBM: 32.18%, P = 0.105).
  • ACBP showed significantly lower residual graft material (11.18% vs. 19.80%, P = 0.006).
  • No significant differences in sinus height gain or socket-related ridge changes between groups (all P > 0.05).

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare a partially demineralized allogeneic cancellous bone plug (ACBP) with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) for guided bone regeneration (GBR), focusing on CBCT-based dimensional outcomes and histomorphometric tissue composition at implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective randomized controlled clinical trial, 25 adults requiring GBR for two common indications-posterior maxillary sinus floor elevation or mandibular posterior extraction socket preservation-were randomized to ACBP (n = 12) or DBBM (n = 13), with collagen membrane coverage in both groups. Radiographic endpoints were indication-specific and were reported separately for sinus and socket sites. CBCT was obtained at baseline and 6 months to assess augmented height (sinus sites) and ridge dimensions at standardized levels (socket sites). At 6 months (implant placement), a 3-mm trephine core was harvested for H&E staining and histomorphometric quantification of vital bone (VB, %) and residual graft material (RG, %). Between-group comparisons used independent-samples t tests (two-sided P 0.05). CONCLUSION: Within a 6-month healing interval, ACBP showed CBCT-based dimensional outcomes comparable to DBBM and a lower residual graft fraction with a similar vital bone fraction at implant placement, suggesting that the observed difference was more related to graft turnover than to greater bone formation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: At routine implant timing (~ 6 months), use of ACBP was associated with a lower residual graft fraction at re-entry while maintaining short-term CBCT-based dimensional stability.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Rao et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a06b8dfe7dec685947ab6b3https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-026-06914-8
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper