Wang Kun, Zhang Jiatong, Ding Mengyao, Xie Yifan, Wang Yan, Jin Chuyi, Yan Mengqing, Liu Lipei, Ding Cheng, Chen Xing
Stomatology Center, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, 310015, China.
School of Stomatology, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, China.
Int J Implant Dent. 2025 Jun 9;11(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s40729-025-00630-w.
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.
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.
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; = 0.321), with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 44.6%). For each secondary outcome, no statistically significant difference was shown between the two groups.
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.
Not applicable.
比较猪骨异种移植物（PBX）和牛骨异种移植物（BBX）在上颌窦底提升术（MSFA）和牙槽嵴保存术（ARP）中的疗效，重点关注组织形态计量学和影像学结果。
使用PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、科学网和Scopus对相关研究进行全面的在线检索，包括截至2025年4月发表的文献（PROSPERO CRD42024628683）。新形成骨（NFB）的百分比作为主要结局。次要结局包括组织形态计量学结果，如残余骨移植物（RBG）和结缔组织（CT），以及影像学结果，包括垂直高度降低、水平宽度降低和体积减小。
在最初识别的577条记录中，纳入了10项研究。分析包括239个接受BBX移植的部位（51个在上颌窦底提升术中，188个在牙槽嵴保存术中）和213个接受PBX移植的部位（51个在上颌窦底提升术中，162个在牙槽嵴保存术中）。共有6项研究报告了202个移植部位（101个PBX，101个BBX）的NFB数据。荟萃分析发现，PBX和BBX之间的NFB无显著差异（加权均数差=1.5，95%可信区间：-1.46至4.46；P=0.321），异质性中等（I²=44.6%）。对于每个次要结局，两组之间均未显示出统计学上的显著差异。
本系统评价发现，在骨移植（上颌窦底提升术/牙槽嵴保存术）中，PBX和BBX在组织形态计量学和影像学结果方面无显著差异，支持PBX作为BBX替代品的临床可比性。需要进一步设计良好的随机对照试验来评估长期结局，如种植体存活率、移植物吸收和骨稳定性。
不适用。
