Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
194,161 studies31 sourcesUpdated 20 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC-ND 4.0In Vivo

Comparative Histological and Histomorphometric Analysis of Cerabone® Plus and Bio-Oss® After Human Sinus Floor Augmentation

  • TADAS KORZINSKAS1,2
  • DENIS RIMASHEVSKIY3
  • BIRZHAN MALIK4
  • JAMES BIELENSTEIN5
  • BAURZHAN DAKENOV6
  • DIANA BAGDONIENE4
  • MIKE BARBECK5,7
7 affiliations
  1. 1Department of Prosthodontics, Geriatric Dentistry and Craniomandibular Disorders, Institute for Dental and Craniofacial Sciences, Benjamin Franklin Charité Campus, Berlin, Germany
  2. 2Bokštų Street Dental Center, Klaipėda, Lithuania
  3. 3Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russian Federation
  4. 4Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics, Astana Medical University, Astana, Kazakhstan
  5. 5BerlinAnalytix GmbH, Berlin, Germany
  6. 6Leader Stom LLP, Astana, Kazakhstan
  7. 7Clinic and Policlinic for Dermatology and Venereology, University Medical Center Rostock, Rostock, Germany
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Background/Aim: Bio-Oss® is the clinical benchmark xenograft for maxillary sinus floor augmentation, whereas Cerabone® is produced by high-temperature sintering into a highly crystalline, volume-stable, but largely bioinert scaffold. Cerabone® plus adds a hyaluronate (Hya) coating intended to “biologize” this otherwise purely osteoconductive scaffold without compromising its sintering-related volume stability. The aim of this study was to compare the histological and histomorphometrical healing pattern of cerabone plus and Bio-Oss after human sinus floor augmentation.

Patients and Methods: Twenty-three patients underwent sinus floor augmentation with Bio-Oss (n=12) or cerabone plus (n=11). Bone core biopsies were harvested at implant placement after 6 months of healing and processed for histological and histomorphometrical analysis. Relative area fractions of newly formed bone (NB), residual bone substitute material (BSM) and connective tissue (CT) were determined and compared by one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test.

Results: Both materials showed comparable osteoconductive integration, with new bone forming directly on the granule surfaces. NB, BSM and CT fractions were 26.84±8.08% vs. 19.33±4.58%, 28.55±10.32% vs. 31.82±4.45%, and 44.61±8.21% vs. 48.86±3.92% for Bio-Oss vs. cerabone plus, respectively; none differed significantly between materials (NB, p=0.398; BSM, p=0.959; CT, p=0.883). Within each material, CT was significantly higher than NB and BSM (Bio-Oss, both p<0.0001; cerabone plus, p<0.0001 and p=0.0053, respectively), while NB and BSM did not differ significantly (Bio-Oss, p=0.994; cerabone plus, p=0.079).

Conclusion: Cerabone plus achieved a histomorphometric tissue distribution comparable to Bio-Oss after 6 months of healing; however, without an uncoated cerabone control group, the specific contribution of the hyaluronate coating cannot be determined.

Related

  1. Glenoid inclination in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with and without baseplate wedge augmentation: a retrospective comparative study
    Riki D. Wylie, Clement Chan, Jay R. Ebert +1
    Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplastyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMC
  2. Comment on Mercurio et al. Outcomes of Acute Achilles Tendon Repair with Platelet-Rich Plasma Augmentation: A Comprehensive Review of Comparative Studies. J. Clin. Med. 2026, 15, 4148.
    Filippo Spiezia, Francesco Oliva, Nicola Maffulli
    Journal of clinical medicinePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMC
  3. Reply to Spiezia et al. Comment on "Mercurio et al. Outcomes of Acute Achilles Tendon Repair with Platelet-Rich Plasma Augmentation: A Comprehensive Review of Comparative Studies. J. Clin. Med. 2026, 15, 4148".
    Michele Mercurio, Giorgia Lucia Benedetto, Elvira Immacolata Parrotta +6
    Journal of clinical medicinePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMC
  4. Arthroscopic Subscapularis Augmentation for the Treatment of Bankart Lesions: A Narrative Review of Indications, Techniques, and Comparative Outcomes
    Jaewook Park, Jaesung Yoo
    Journal of Clinical MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Surgery & anaesthesiaCrossref
  5. Comparative analysis of GAN-based augmentation pipelines for Parkinson's hypokinetic dysarthria severity detection using deep learning
    Aurobindo S, Prakash Ramachandran, Rajesh Kumar M
    Frontiers in artificial intelligencePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textPhysiologyEurope PMCPMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{korzinskas2026comparative,
  title = {{Comparative Histological and Histomorphometric Analysis of Cerabone® Plus and Bio-Oss® After Human Sinus Floor Augmentation}},
  author = {TADAS KORZINSKAS and DENIS RIMASHEVSKIY and BIRZHAN MALIK and JAMES BIELENSTEIN and BAURZHAN DAKENOV and DIANA BAGDONIENE and MIKE BARBECK},
  journal = {In Vivo},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.21873/invivo.14511},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.14511},
  note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Comparative Histological and Histomorphometric Analysis of Cerabone® Plus and Bio-Oss® After Human Sinus Floor Augmentation
AU  - TADAS KORZINSKAS
AU  - DENIS RIMASHEVSKIY
AU  - BIRZHAN MALIK
AU  - JAMES BIELENSTEIN
AU  - BAURZHAN DAKENOV
AU  - DIANA BAGDONIENE
AU  - MIKE BARBECK
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/29
JO  - In Vivo
DO  - 10.21873/invivo.14511
UR  - https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.14511
AB  - Background/Aim: Bio-Oss® is the clinical benchmark xenograft for maxillary sinus floor augmentation, whereas Cerabone® is produced by high-temperature sintering into a highly crystalline, volume-stable, but largely bioinert scaffold. Cerabone® plus adds a hyaluronate (Hya) coating intended to “biologize” this otherwise purely osteoconductive scaffold without compromising its sintering-related volume stability. The aim of this study was to compare the histological and histomorphometrical healing pattern of cerabone plus and Bio-Oss after human sinus floor augmentation.  Patients and Methods: Twenty-three patients underwent sinus floor augmentation with Bio-Oss (n=12) or cerabone plus (n=11). Bone core biopsies were harvested at implant placement after 6 months of healing and processed for histological and histomorphometrical analysis. Relative area fractions of newly formed bone (NB), residual bone substitute material (BSM) and connective tissue (CT) were determined and compared by one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test.  Results: Both materials showed comparable osteoconductive integration, with new bone forming directly on the granule surfaces. NB, BSM and CT fractions were 26.84±8.08% vs. 19.33±4.58%, 28.55±10.32% vs. 31.82±4.45%, and 44.61±8.21% vs. 48.86±3.92% for Bio-Oss vs. cerabone plus, respectively; none differed significantly between materials (NB, p=0.398; BSM, p=0.959; CT, p=0.883). Within each material, CT was significantly higher than NB and BSM (Bio-Oss, both p<0.0001; cerabone plus, p<0.0001 and p=0.0053, respectively), while NB and BSM did not differ significantly (Bio-Oss, p=0.994; cerabone plus, p=0.079).  Conclusion: Cerabone plus achieved a histomorphometric tissue distribution comparable to Bio-Oss after 6 months of healing; however, without an uncoated cerabone control group, the specific contribution of the hyaluronate coating cannot be determined.
SN  - 0258-851X
SN  - 1791-7549
ER  -