Comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Objective To compare the efficacy of porcine bone xenografts (PBX) and bovine bone xenografts (BBX) in maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) and alveolar ridge preservation (ARP), focusing on histomorphometric and radiographic outcomes. Materials and methods A comprehensive online searc...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kun Wang, Jiatong Zhang, Mengyao Ding, Yifan Xie, Yan Wang, Chuyi Jin, Mengqing Yan, Lipei Liu, Cheng Ding, Xing Chen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SpringerOpen 2025-06-01
Series:International Journal of Implant Dentistry
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00630-w
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850222499463168000
author Kun Wang
Jiatong Zhang
Mengyao Ding
Yifan Xie
Yan Wang
Chuyi Jin
Mengqing Yan
Lipei Liu
Cheng Ding
Xing Chen
author_facet Kun Wang
Jiatong Zhang
Mengyao Ding
Yifan Xie
Yan Wang
Chuyi Jin
Mengqing Yan
Lipei Liu
Cheng Ding
Xing Chen
author_sort Kun Wang
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Objective To compare the efficacy of porcine bone xenografts (PBX) and bovine bone xenografts (BBX) in maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) and alveolar ridge preservation (ARP), focusing on histomorphometric and radiographic outcomes. Materials and methods A comprehensive online search for relevant studies was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus, including literature published up to April 2025 (PROSPERO CRD42024628683). The percentage of newly formed bone (NFB) served as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included histomorphometric results such as residual bone graft (RBG) and connective tissue (CT), as well as radiographic results, including vertical height reduction, horizontal width reduction, and volume reduction. Results Out of 577 initially identified records, 10 studies were included. The analysis included 239 sites grafted with BBX (51 in MSFA, 188 in ARP) and 213 sites with PBX (51 in MSFA, 162 in ARP). A total of 6 studies reported data on NFB across 202 grafted sites (101 PBX, 101 BBX). The meta-analysis found no significant difference in NFB between PBX and BBX (WMD = 1.5, 95% CI: −1.46 to 4.46; p = 0.321), with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 44.6%). For each secondary outcome, no statistically significant difference was shown between the two groups. Conclusion This systematic review found no significant differences in histomorphometric and radiographic outcomes between PBX and BBX in bone grafting (MSFA/ARP), supporting the clinical comparability of PBX as an alternative to BBX. Further well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes such as implant survival, graft resorption, and bone stability. Clinical trial number Not applicable.
format Article
id doaj-art-8f474b2ab0ba49df9bc683768b2e768a
institution OA Journals
issn 2198-4034
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher SpringerOpen
record_format Article
series International Journal of Implant Dentistry
spelling doaj-art-8f474b2ab0ba49df9bc683768b2e768a2025-08-20T02:06:19ZengSpringerOpenInternational Journal of Implant Dentistry2198-40342025-06-0111111410.1186/s40729-025-00630-wComparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysisKun Wang0Jiatong Zhang1Mengyao Ding2Yifan Xie3Yan Wang4Chuyi Jin5Mengqing Yan6Lipei Liu7Cheng Ding8Xing Chen9Stomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityStomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal UniversityAbstract Objective To compare the efficacy of porcine bone xenografts (PBX) and bovine bone xenografts (BBX) in maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) and alveolar ridge preservation (ARP), focusing on histomorphometric and radiographic outcomes. Materials and methods A comprehensive online search for relevant studies was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus, including literature published up to April 2025 (PROSPERO CRD42024628683). The percentage of newly formed bone (NFB) served as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included histomorphometric results such as residual bone graft (RBG) and connective tissue (CT), as well as radiographic results, including vertical height reduction, horizontal width reduction, and volume reduction. Results Out of 577 initially identified records, 10 studies were included. The analysis included 239 sites grafted with BBX (51 in MSFA, 188 in ARP) and 213 sites with PBX (51 in MSFA, 162 in ARP). A total of 6 studies reported data on NFB across 202 grafted sites (101 PBX, 101 BBX). The meta-analysis found no significant difference in NFB between PBX and BBX (WMD = 1.5, 95% CI: −1.46 to 4.46; p = 0.321), with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 44.6%). For each secondary outcome, no statistically significant difference was shown between the two groups. Conclusion This systematic review found no significant differences in histomorphometric and radiographic outcomes between PBX and BBX in bone grafting (MSFA/ARP), supporting the clinical comparability of PBX as an alternative to BBX. Further well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes such as implant survival, graft resorption, and bone stability. Clinical trial number Not applicable.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00630-wBone substitutesMaxillary sinus floor augmentationAlveolar ridge preservationXenograft
spellingShingle Kun Wang
Jiatong Zhang
Mengyao Ding
Yifan Xie
Yan Wang
Chuyi Jin
Mengqing Yan
Lipei Liu
Cheng Ding
Xing Chen
Comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis
International Journal of Implant Dentistry
Bone substitutes
Maxillary sinus floor augmentation
Alveolar ridge preservation
Xenograft
title Comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparative evaluation of porcine and bovine bone xenografts in bone grafting a systematic review and meta analysis
topic Bone substitutes
Maxillary sinus floor augmentation
Alveolar ridge preservation
Xenograft
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00630-w
work_keys_str_mv AT kunwang comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT jiatongzhang comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mengyaoding comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yifanxie comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yanwang comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chuyijin comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mengqingyan comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lipeiliu comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chengding comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xingchen comparativeevaluationofporcineandbovinebonexenograftsinbonegraftingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis