Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare differences between Bio-Oss and CORAGRAF in the rate of bone formation during graft replacement by assessing the density of new bone formation around the implant after sinus floor augmentation. We chose a total of nine systemically healthy patients from dental specialist clinics who planned to have bilateral sinus augmentation prior to implant placement. Bilateral sinus floor augmentation (9 x 2 = 18) was performed with the lateral window technique followed by implant placement (9 x 2 = 18). One site used Bio-Oss and the other coral (CORAGRAF) as the graft material. Radiographic imaging was performed periodically (on the day of surgery, and at 1, 3 and 6 months post surgery) using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to measure the bone density at the area of augmented sinus in Hounsfield units (HU). The median of bone density (HU) at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months post surgery for Bio-Oss was higher than for Coragraf. The difference between Bio Oss and Coragraf was statistically significant (p<0.05). Bio-Oss as a bone substitute in sinus augmentation procedures was superior to Coragraf. However, clinically, the use of Coragraf as a bone substitute in sinus augmentation still gives promising results.