A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial to Investigate the Capability of Straumann® VivOss™ Compared to Geistlich Bio-Oss® in Sinus Floor Augmentation
Phase: NA
Conditions: Healthy
Sponsor: Institut Straumann AG

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 1 of 47 
         
CR 03/13 
 
A randomized controlled clinical trial to investigate the 
capability of Straumann® VivOss™ compared to 
Geistlich Bio-Oss® in sinus floor augmentation.   
 
 
19 January 2015 
 
 
Protocol reviewed and approved by: 
Dr. Julia Dorn 
 
 
 
 
Clinical Research Associate 
 
Signature 
 
Date 
(dd/mm/yyyy) 
 
Dr. Martin Schuler 
 
 
 
 
 
Head of Clinical Research 
 
Signature 
 
Date 
(dd/mm/yyyy) 
 
 
 
ClinicalTrials.GOV identifier: 
NCT02288182 
 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 2 of 47 
Contact Information 
Clinical Investigators: 
Center 01: 
 
Principal Investigator: 
PD Dr. Ronald E. Jung, PhD 
Klinik für Kronen- und Brückenprothetik, Teilprothetik und 
zahnärztliche Materialkunde 
Zentrum für Zahnmedizin, Universität Zürich 
Plattenstrasse 11 
CH-8032 Zürich, Switzerland 
Phone Number: +41 44 634 32 51 
Fax Number: +41 44 634 43 05 
E-Mail: ronald.jung@zzm.uzh.ch 
 
Co-Investigator: 
Prof. Christoph Hämmerle 
Klinik für Kronen- und Brückenprothetik, Teilprothetik und 
zahnärztliche Materialkunde 
Zentrum für Zahnmedizin, Universität Zürich 
Plattenstrasse 11 
CH-8032 Zürich, Switzerland 
Phone Number: +41 44 634 32 51 
Fax Number: +41 44 634 43 05 
E-Mail: christoph.hammerle@zzm.uzh.ch 
 
 
Center 02: 
 
Dr. med. Dr. med. dent. Andres Stricker 
Zentrum für Implantologie, Parodontologie und 3D- Diagnostik 
Wessenbergstrasse 6 
D-78462 Konstanz, Deutschland 
Phone Number: +49 75 31 91 71 10 
E-Mail: a.stricker@gmx.net 
 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 3 of 47 
Sponsor: 
Institut Straumann AG 
Peter Merian Weg 12 
CH- 4002 Basel 
Switzerland 
Phone number: +41 61 965 11 11 
Fax number: +41 61 965 11 10 
 
 
Sponsor Representative: 
 
 
Dr. Julia Dorn 
Clinical Research Associate 
Clinical Research 
Phone number: +41 61 965 1506 
Fax number: +41 61 965 11 10 
E-mail: julia.dorn@straumann.com 
 
 
 
 
Dr. Martin Schuler  
Head of Clinical Research 
Clinical Research 
Phone number: +41 61 965 1628 
Fax number: +41 61 965 11 10 
E-mail: martin.schuler@straumann.com 
 
 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 4 of 47 
Synopsis 
 
Study Title: 
A randomized controlled clinical trial to investigate the capability of 
Straumann® VivOss™ compared to Geistlich Bio-Oss in sinus 
floor augmentation.   
Protocol Code: 
CR 03/13 
Objective 
To demonstrate superiority of Straumann® VivOss™ compared to 
Geistlich Bio-Oss in regards to the ratio of newly formed bone to 
residual bone substitute.  
Study Design: 
A prospective, randomized, controlled, open label study. 
Subject Population: 
Inclusion Criteria 
1. Subject must have voluntarily signed the informed consent 
before any study related action 
2. Males and females with at least 18 years of age (including 
18 years) 
3. Subject needs augmentation procedure in the sinus to 
prepare for implant placement. 
4. Subject must have a residual bone height of 2 to 4 mm.    
5. Adequate oral hygiene ((Full mouth plaque index (O’Leary, 
et al. 1972 ) <25%) at baseline 
6. Adequate control of inflammation ((full mouth bleeding on 
probing (Ainamo and Bay 1975)) ≤25% at baseline 
Exclusion Criteria 
Pre-surgical exclusion criteria 
1. Systemic disease that would interfere with bone or wound 
healing and dental implant therapy (e.g. uncontrolled 
diabetes) 
2. Any contraindications for general bone grafting and oral 
surgical procedures 
3. Any anomalies of the sinus that could interfere with planned 
procedures 
4. History of local irradiation therapy 
5. Local inflammation, including untreated periodontitis 
6. Medical conditions requiring chronic high dose steroid 
therapy 
7. Treatment with an investigational drug or device within a 30 
day period immediately prior to surgery at visit 2, or 
expected participation in any other investigational drug or 
device study during the conduct of this trial. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 5 of 47 
8. Antibiotic treatment or anti-inflammatory treatment within 4 
weeks prior to surgery 
9. History of alcoholism or drug abuse 
10. Immunocompromised subjects 
11. Subjects who smoke >10 cigarettes per day or tobacco 
equivalents or chew tobacco 
12. Conditions or circumstances, in the opinion of the 
investigator, which would prevent completion of study 
participation or interfere with analysis of study results, such 
as history of non-compliance or unreliability 
13. Physical or mental disabilities that would interfere with the 
ability to perform adequate oral hygiene 
14. Current pregnancy (pregnancy test) and breastfeeding 
women 
Secondary exclusion criteria at or after surgery 
1. Defects of the Schneider Membrane  
Treatment Plan: 
 Visit 0 (Informed Consent, 2 to 14 days before screening): 
signing informed consent after informed consent process. 
 Visit 1 (Screening):  
pregnancy test (only if female with childbearing potential), 
demographic data, medical/dental history, inclusion/exclusion 
criteria, planned implant site, CBCT (not older than 12 months) 
 Visit 2 (Sinus elevation):  
adverse events, concomitant medication, randomization, details 
of surgery, secondary exclusion criteria, intra-oral photographs 
 Visit 3 (wound healing assessment):  
adverse events, concomitant medication, suture removal, post-
operative wound healing control, intra-oral photographs  
 Visit 4 (Implant placement / Histology): 
adverse events, concomitant medication, histology sampling, 
dental implant placement, intra-oral photographs 
 Visit 5 (wound healing assessment): 
adverse events, concomitant medication, suture removal, post-
operative wound healing control, intra-oral photographs 
 Visit 6 (Initial implant loading): 
adverse events, concomitant medication, survival of the dental 
implant, success of the dental implant, intra-oral photographs, 
periapical x-ray  
Primary Endpoint: 
The histological evaluation of the ratio of newly formed bone to 
residual bone graft in Straumann® VivOss™ compared to Geistlich 
BioOss® at visit 4 (6 month ± 7 days, after sinus elevation).  
Secondary Endpoints: 
 Survival rate of study implants evaluated at visit 6 (Initial 
implant loading) 
 Success rate of study implants evaluated at visit 6 (Initial 
implant loading) 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 6 of 47 
Study Device(s): 
Test: Synthetic biphasic calcium phosphate (HA/TCP 10:90) 
Straumann® VivOss™  
Comparator: Demineralized bovine bone mineral (Geistlich Bio-
Oss®)  
Safety: 
The subjects will be monitored continuously for adverse events by 
the investigators. 
Registration Status: 
All products are CE marked 
Study Duration: 
The total study duration for each subject should be 9-14 months 
from screening to last visit. 
Number of 
participating Centres: 
Two centres 
Number of subjects 
planned to be 
enrolled: 
50 subjects 
(25 in the test group, 25 in the comparator group) 
Sponsor: 
Institut Straumann AG 
Peter Merian-Weg 12 
CH-4002 Basel 
Switzerland 
Investigators: 
Dr. Ronald E. Jung, Zurich (Switzerland) 
Dr. Dr. Andres Stricker, Constance (Germany) 
Compliance: 
This study and any amendments will be performed according to 
ISO 14155 (Second Edition, 2011-02-01) and conform to the 
Declaration of Helsinki (last revised Seoul 2008) and local legal 
and regulatory requirements. 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 7 of 47 
Schedule of Assessment 
Tasks 
Visit 0 
Visit 1 
Visit 2 
Visit 3 
Visit 4 
Visit 5 
Visit 6 
 
Informed 
Consent 
Screening Visit 
 
Sinus elevation 
(Baseline) 
 
Wound healing 
assessment 
Implant 
placement 
Wound healing 
assessment 
Initial implant 
loading 
28-2 days before 
screening 
14-0 days 
before Baseline 
Day 0 
Day 7-14 
6 months ± 
7 days 
7-14 days after 
visit 4 
4 months ± 1 month 
after visit 4 
Informed Consent  
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
If female, pregnancy test 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Demographics (date of birth, 
gender, ethnic origin)  
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Medical & Dental History 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Inclusion /Exclusion Criteria 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Planned implant site 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Cone Beam CT (CBCT) 
 
X*1, *2 
 
 
 
 
 
Adverse events  
 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Concomitant medication  
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Randomization 
 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
Augmentation  
 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
Secondary inclusion criteria 
 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
Intra-oral Photographs  
 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Suture Removal  
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
Implant Placement 
 
 
 
 
X 
 
 
Bone Biopsy  
 
 
 
 
X 
 
 
Wound healing assessment 
 
 
 
X 
 
X 
 
Periapical x-ray 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X*2 
Implant survival 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
Implant success 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
*1 If an CBCT was taken up to 12 months in advance to the baseline visit (visit 2) there is no need to take a new CBCT. 
*2 Radiographs should only be taken if clinically necessary.

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 8 of 47 
Abbreviations: 
Ø 
Diameter 
AE 
Adverse Event 
BoP 
Bleeding on Probing 
CBCT 
Cone Beam Computed Tomography 
CE 
Communauté Européenne (Marking of registered device in 
Europe) 
CRF 
Case Report Form 
FDI 
Fédération Dentaire Internationale 
FMPPD 
Full Mouth Probing Pocket Depth 
FU 
Follow-up 
GBR 
Guided Bone Regeneration 
GCP 
Good Clinical Practice 
HA 
Hydroxyapatite 
IA 
Interim Analysis 
ICF 
Informed Consent Form 
ID 
Identity 
IEC 
Independent Ethics Committee 
ISO 
 
International Organization for Standardization 
mm 
Millimetre 
μm 
Micrometer 
N 
Number 
PP 
Per Protocol 
SADE 
Serious Adverse Device Effect 
SAE 
Serious Adverse Event 
SD 
Study Day 
STL 
Soft Tissue Level 
TCP 
Tri-Calcium-Phosphate 
USADE 
Unanticipated Serious Adverse Device Effect 
 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 9 of 47 
1 
Table of Contents 
Contact Information ............................................................................................................... 2 
2 
Background and Rationale ............................................................................................13 
3 
Study Endpoints ............................................................................................................14 
3.1 
Primary Endpoint ....................................................................................................14 
3.2 
Secondary Endpoints .............................................................................................14 
4 
Study Design .................................................................................................................14 
4.1 
Type and Design of Study ......................................................................................14 
4.2 
Indications for use ..................................................................................................14 
4.3 
Study Treatments ...................................................................................................14 
4.4 
Number of Subjects ................................................................................................15 
4.5 
Study Duration .......................................................................................................15 
5 
Study Population ...........................................................................................................15 
5.1 
Inclusion Criteria ....................................................................................................15 
5.2 
Exclusion Criteria ...................................................................................................15 
5.3 
Secondary exclusion criteria at sinus floor elevation...............................................16 
5.4 
Treatment Groups ..................................................................................................16 
6 
Investigational Device(s) ...............................................................................................16 
6.1 
General Description of the Investigational Devices .................................................16 
6.1.1 
Instruction for Use, Handling, and Labelling ....................................................17 
6.1.2 
Storage ...........................................................................................................17 
6.1.3 
Risks and Benefits of the Investigational Device and Clinical Investigation .....17 
6.2 
Comparators ..........................................................................................................18 
6.3 
Additionall products used in the study ....................................................................18 
6.4 
Device Accountability .............................................................................................18 
6.5 
Device Complaints .................................................................................................18 
7 
Study Procedures ..........................................................................................................18 
7.1 
Informed Consent ...................................................................................................18 
7.2 
Pregnancy Test ......................................................................................................19 
7.3 
Demographics ........................................................................................................19 
7.4 
Medical History & Dental History ............................................................................19 
7.5 
Inclusion / Exclusion Criteria ..................................................................................20 
7.6 
Cone Beam CT ......................................................................................................20 
7.7 
Adverse Events (please see section 9. Definitions of Adverse Events and Device 
deficiencies (from ISO 14155)) .........................................................................................20 
7.8 
Concomitant Medications .......................................................................................20 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 10 of 47 
7.9 
Randomization .......................................................................................................20 
7.10 Augmentation .........................................................................................................21 
7.11 Secondary Inclusion criteria ...................................................................................21 
7.12 Intra-oral Photographs ............................................................................................21 
7.13 Suture removal .......................................................................................................22 
7.14 Biopsy ....................................................................................................................22 
7.15 Implant placement ..................................................................................................22 
7.16 Wound healing assessment ...................................................................................22 
7.17 Periapical x-rays .....................................................................................................22 
7.18 Implant survival ......................................................................................................22 
7.19 Implant success .....................................................................................................22 
8 
Study conduct ...............................................................................................................23 
8.1 
Visit Windows .........................................................................................................23 
8.2 
Screening Failures .................................................................................................23 
8.3 
Subject Completion / Withdrawal ............................................................................23 
8.4 
Subject Replacement Policy ...................................................................................24 
8.5 
Missed Visits ..........................................................................................................24 
8.6 
Protocol Deviations ................................................................................................24 
9 
Definitions of Adverse Events and Device Deficiencies (from ISO 14155) .....................24 
9.1 
Investigational medical device ................................................................................24 
9.2 
Adverse Event (AE) ................................................................................................24 
9.3 
Expected adverse events .......................................................................................24 
9.4 
Serious Adverse Event (SAE) ................................................................................25 
9.5 
Adverse Device Effect (ADE) .................................................................................25 
9.6 
Serious Adverse Device Effect (SADE) ..................................................................25 
9.7 
Unanticipated Serious Adverse Device Effect (USADE) .........................................26 
9.8 
Device deficiency ...................................................................................................26 
9.9 
Assessment of Adverse Events ..............................................................................27 
9.10 Severity of Adverse Events ....................................................................................28 
9.11 AE Reporting ..........................................................................................................28 
9.12 SAE Reporting .......................................................................................................28 
9.13 Monitoring / Follow-up of Subjects with Adverse Events .........................................29 
9.14 Pregnancy ..............................................................................................................29 
10 
Statistical Procedures ................................................................................................29 
10.1 Statistical Analysis..................................................................................................29 
10.2 Statistical Hypotheses ............................................................................................30 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 11 of 47 
10.3 Sample Size Calculation ........................................................................................30 
10.4 Populations for Analysis .........................................................................................31 
10.4.1 
Per Protocol Set (PP) ......................................................................................31 
10.4.2 
Full Analysis Set (FA) ......................................................................................31 
10.4.3 
Safety Analysis Set (SA) .................................................................................31 
10.4.4 
Not Treated (NT) .............................................................................................31 
10.4.5 
Final Analysis ..................................................................................................31 
11 
Data Management .....................................................................................................31 
11.1.1 
Data Collection ................................................................................................31 
11.1.2 
Case Report Forms .........................................................................................32 
11.1.3 
Data Entry and Management ...........................................................................32 
12 
Regulatory and Ethical Requirements ........................................................................32 
12.1 Basic requirements.................................................................................................32 
12.2 Informed Consent ...................................................................................................32 
12.3 Institutional Review Board / Ethics Committee .......................................................33 
12.4 Regulatory Compliance ..........................................................................................33 
13 
Study Management ....................................................................................................33 
13.1 Reports and Record Management ..........................................................................33 
13.1.1 
Investigator Records .......................................................................................33 
13.1.2 
Case Report Forms .........................................................................................34 
13.1.3 
Source Documents ..........................................................................................34 
13.1.4 
Records/data Retention ...................................................................................34 
13.1.5 
Subject Data Protection ...................................................................................34 
13.2 Quality Control and Assurance ...............................................................................35 
13.2.1 
Monitoring (general aspects) ...........................................................................35 
13.2.2 
Pre-study Visit .................................................................................................35 
13.2.3 
Study Initiation Visit .........................................................................................35 
13.2.4 
Routine Monitoring Visits .................................................................................36 
13.2.5 
Close out Visit .................................................................................................36 
13.2.6 
Study Termination ...........................................................................................36 
13.2.7 
Centre discontinuation .....................................................................................37 
13.2.8 
Audits and Inspections ....................................................................................37 
13.3 Protocol Amendments ............................................................................................37 
13.4 Publications ............................................................................................................38 
14 
AGREEMEEMENT SIGNATURES ............................................................................39 
15 
Appendix ....................................................................................................................40 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 12 of 47 
Appendix 1: WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research 
Involving Human Subjects.................................................................................................40 
16 
References ................................................................................................................46 
 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 13 of 47 
2 
Background and Rationale 
Maxillary sinus floor elevation to allow the placement of endosseous implants has become a 
standard surgical procedure in the last decades with reliable long-term results, both in clinical 
1,2,3 and experimental studies.4,5,6,7,8 
Bone grafting procedures have been shown to be predictable methods for augmenting the 
bone volume in areas with deficient bone quantity or quality in order to allow dental implant 
insertion according to planned prosthetic position. 
Autogenous bone grafts (autografts) have been recommended to be used in order to act as 
an osteoinductive and osteoconductive scaffold.9 The material is harvested at intraoral or 
extraoral sites.10 The successful use of autogenous bone as bone void filler has made this 
material the standard as it has already been for bone reconstructive surgery in orthopedics. 
Nevertheless, this material has a number of disadvantages. Most importantly, the necessity 
for a second site to harvest the autogenous bone increases the duration of the surgical 
intervention, the surgical risk as well as post-surgical morbidity at harvesting site. In order to 
avoid the drawbacks of this material, bone graft substitutes have been proposed. These can 
be classified in the following groups: allografts (from same species (human), but different 
individual), xenografts (from different species, usually animal derived from bovine origin) and 
alloplast (synthetic origin). They have been shown to be effective and have demonstrated a 
high implant success rate, but much controversy still exists regarding the capability of these 
materials to be resorbed and substituted by newly formed bone to allow adequate 
osseointegration of dental implants. 
Bio-Oss®, a deproteinized bovine bone mineral, is one of the most commonly used and 
evidence-based bone substitute materials in the field of dental surgery.11 Pre-clinical12 and 
clinical studies13 have shown that Bio-Oss® can preserve bone dimensions adequately. The 
combination of Bio-Oss® and the resorbable collagen membrane Bio-Gide® has been found 
to be effective for bone regeneration in situations where dental implants are placed.14 ,15 
Studies have shown that the biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) Straumann BoneCeramic® 
used for sinus floor elevations or alveolar ridge preservation can result similar bone changes 
to standard graft material (Bio-Oss®), 16,17 and can result in excellent survival and success 
rates of dental implants placed subsequently18. Straumann BoneCeramic® consists of 
hydroxyapatite (HA) and β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) in a 60:40 ratio, so that the HA acts 
as a scaffold for space maintenance while the β-TCP resorbs and supports bone 
regeneration. A new second generation macro- and microporous BCP (mean micropore 
diameter 1 μm) has been developed with an HA/TCP ratio of 10:90 and controlled 
microporosity, which may be an important factor in the osteoconductive capacity of calcium 
phosphate ceramics.19 This material has demonstrated biocompatibility and 
osteoconductivity20,21 and is designed to act as a scaffold that allows cells to infiltrate the site 
of the defect for subsequent bone regeneration and is designed to provide substitute 
degradation, i.e. chemical/non-cellular dissolution of BCP in parallel with resorption by 
osteoclasts. Bone formation starts with an organic cellular matrix being formed by cells 
(including pre-osteoblasts) around the BCP particles. Preclinical data have indicated that in 
addition to direct bone deposition on the surface of the BCP particles, mineralization and 
ossification also occurs in the inter-granular spaces. This occurs as a result of calcium and 
phosphate, released by substitute degradation, that become embedded in the organic matrix, 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 14 of 47 
similar to the process of ossification that occurs during osteogenesis; this is assumed to 
enable random bone formation throughout the defect. 
3 
Study Endpoints 
3.1 
Primary Endpoint 
 
To histologically evaluate the ratio of newly formed bone to residual bone graft in 
Straumann® VivOss™ compared to Geistlich Bio-Oss® at 6 months (± 1 7 days) after 
sinus floor augmentation.  
3.2 
Secondary Endpoints 
 
Survival rate of study implants evaluated at visit 6 (Initial implant loading) 
 
Success rate of study implants evaluated at visit 6  (Initial implant loading)  
Crestal bone level loss as well as the criteria according to Buser et al. will be used to 
define the survival and success rate of study implants. 
4 
Study Design 
4.1 
Type and Design of Study 
This is a prospective, randomized, controlled, open label study, conducted at two sites in 
Germany and Switzerland comparing two treatment groups.  
4.2 
Indications for use 
The package inserts (instructions for use) provide detailed information and instructions for 
the usage of the investigational bone substitute material and membrane as well as for the 
comparator products. 
All used products are CE marked. 
4.3 
Study Treatments 
Before entering into the study, each subject has to sign an informed consent. A subject is 
enrolled if she/he meets all inclusion criteria and at the same time does not meet any 
exclusion criteria. Enrolled subjects will be scheduled for sinus elevation. At surgery subject 
eligibility will again be evaluated according to secondary exclusion criteria. Subjects who do 
not meet any secondary exclusion criteria are randomized to one of the following groups: 
a) Sinus floor elevation with Straumann® VivOss™  
b) Sinus floor elevation with Geistlich Bio-Oss®  
After a healing time of 1-2 weeks, sutures are removed, and the wound healing is evaluated. 
After a healing time of 6 months, an intermediate osteotomy for the dental implant placement 
is done by means of a trephine burr in such a way that the biopsy is harvested at the same 
time. Dental implant placement will be completed according to the standard procedure of the 
clinic. After a healing time of 1-2 weeks, the sutures are removed and the wound healing is 
evaluated. 4 months after implant placement the implant is initially loaded and the survival as 
well as the success rate will be evaluated.  

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 15 of 47 
4.4 
Number of Subjects 
This study will be performed in two clinical centres, one in Germany and one in Switzerland; 
these centres are expected to recruit 50 subjects in total, 25 subjects in test group, 25 
subjects in control. Planned subject recruitment period is 3 months. The recruitment is 
competitive. Recruitment will be stopped as soon as recruitment is complete. 
4.5 
Study Duration 
The primary endpoint will be assessed 6 months ± 7 days after sinus floor elevation. The 
entire study duration for each enrolled subjects is 9-14 months (screening to last visit). 
The entire study duration from first patient in until last patient out will be approximately 17 
months. 
5 
Study Population 
Generally healthy female and male subjects, who are at least 18 years of age and are willing 
to participate in this study and who would benefit from a prosthetic reconstruction with a 
dental implant but need a sinus floor elevation in either one or both sinuses. 
5.1 
Inclusion Criteria 
The subjects will be evaluated for initial study eligibility during the screening visit. Those 
subjects who appear eligible according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria will be asked to sign 
an informed consent form to be enrolled into the study. The following criteria must be met for 
inclusion in the study: 
1. Subject must have voluntarily signed the informed consent before any study related 
action 
2. Males and females with at least 18 years of age (including 18 years) 
3. Subject needs augmentation procedure in the sinus to prepare for implant placement. 
4. Subject must have a residual bone height of 2 to 4 mm.    
5. Adequate oral hygiene ((Full mouth plaque index (O’Leary, et al. 1972 ) <25%) at 
baseline 
6. Adequate control of inflammation ((full mouth bleeding on probing (Ainamo and Bay 
1975)) ≤25% at baseline 
5.2 
Exclusion Criteria 
If any of the following criteria are met, the subject must be excluded from the study: 
1. Systemic disease that would interfere with bone or wound healing and dental implant 
therapy (e.g. uncontrolled diabetes) 
2. Systemic disease that would interfere with bone or wound healing and dental implant 
therapy (e.g. uncontrolled diabetes) 
3. Any contraindications for general bone grafting and oral surgical procedures 
4. Any anomalies of the sinus that could interfere with planned procedures 
5. History of local irradiation therapy 
6. Local inflammation, including untreated periodontitis 
7. Medical conditions requiring chronic high dose steroid therapy 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 16 of 47 
8. Treatment with an investigational drug or device within a 30 day period immediately 
prior to surgery at visit 2, or expected participation in any other investigational drug or 
device study during the conduct of this trial. 
9. Antibiotic treatment or anti-inflammatory treatment within 4 weeks prior to surgery 
10. History of alcoholism or drug abuse 
11. Immunocompromised subjects 
12. Subjects who smoke >10 cigarettes per day or tobacco equivalents or chew tobacco 
13. Conditions or circumstances, in the opinion of the investigator, which would prevent 
completion of study participation or interfere with analysis of study results, such as 
history of non-compliance or unreliability 
14. Physical or mental disabilities that would interfere with the ability to perform adequate 
oral hygiene 
15. Current pregnancy (pregnancy test) and breastfeeding women 
5.3 
Secondary exclusion criteria at sinus floor elevation 
If the following criteria is met at sinus floor elevation, the subject must be excluded from the 
study: 
1. Defects of the Schneider Membrane  
5.4 
Treatment Groups 
In total 50 subjects will be randomize equally into test or control group (25 patients in each 
group). 
The subjects in the test group receive sinus floor elevation with HA/TCP 10:90 (Straumann® 
VivOss™) via a lateral approach. In the comparator group, subjects receive sinus floor 
elevation with demineralized bovine mineral (Bio-Oss®) via a lateral approach. 
Both groups follow the same schedule of assessments. 
6 
Investigational Device(s) 
6.1 
General Description of the Investigational Devices 
All investigational devices used in this study are CE marked. 
Straumann® VivOss™Straumann® VivOss™, is a synthetic bone graft substitute in 
granulated form. It consists of > 90% TCP (Tri-Calcium-Phosphate –Ca3(PO4)2) and < 10% 
Hydroxyapatite (Ca10(PO4)6 (OH)2). The granules have a size of 250-1000 µm. 
Straumann® VivOss™ is both osteoconductive and has a porous trabecular structure that 
resembles the interconnected porosity of human cancellous bone. Straumann® VivOss™ 
induces and guides the three dimensional regeneration of bone in the defect site into which it 
is implanted. It’s intended to be used for applications in oral and maxillofacial surgery and 
dentistry for filling or reconstruction of multiple walled (artificial or degenerative) bone 
defects. 
The Sponsor supplies the product. It shall be used according to the instructions of the 
manufacturer. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 17 of 47 
6.1.1 Instruction for Use, Handling, and Labelling 
For the instructions for use, handling and labelling, the investigator has to refer to the 
instruction for use of the study products. In case of any questions, comments or doubts, the 
investigator can contact Institut Straumann AG. 
In the event of a problem with the study product the monitor or the study manager should be 
informed immediately. In case of missing or lost study products all discrepancies have to be 
documented. 
6.1.2 Storage 
The study products provided by the Sponsor are to be used for the subjects enrolled in the 
clinical study only. The study products should be stored in its original container until used 
and as it is indicated in the package insert. 
Handling of unused study products can be found under section 6.3 Device Accountability. 
6.1.3 Risks and Benefits of the Investigational Device and Clinical Investigation 
The investigational and control devices used in this study are CE marked. The clinical 
procedures performed are standard procedures. 
The risk analyses for the investigational devices were conducted according to ISO 14971. 
It can be stated that the risk from the investigational devices is low and acceptable, and the 
identified risk hazards from the devices are justified when considered against the significant 
clinical benefits provided. The investigational devices raise no new questions for safety and 
effectiveness as compared to similar devices. The investigator follows the instructions for use 
recommended by the manufacturer. 
The possible risks and discomforts that may be associated with participation in this study are 
no different than having the same procedure (Sinus floor augmentation and placement of 
dental implants in a 2 stage approach) done without participation in this study. The following 
risks and adverse events can occur: 
 
General risks that exist with surgical procedures in the oral cavity: Bleeding and 
bruising, pain and swelling after the surgical procedure. Infections in the soft and hard 
tissue, delayed healing, recession of the gum and/or bone, temporary or permanent 
nerve damage in the jaw, oro-sinus or oro-nasal fistulas and possible rejection are 
very rare. 
 
General risks that exist with a surgical procedure using barrier membranes and can 
therefore not be completely ruled out: soft tissue dehiscence (tissue damage), 
haematoma, pain, increased sensitivity and redness due to inflammation 
 
Gingival inflammation (oral hygiene dependent): Oral hygiene instructions are given 
and oral hygiene procedures performed to prevent gingival inflammation. 
 
The following are examples of complications that can generally occur with a surgical 
procedure in the oral cavity and can therefore not be completely ruled out: 
o 
Slight pain and tenderness the first days after surgery 
o 
Slight swelling and redness the first days after surgery 
 
Pregnancy during the study, in particular at surgery, and the use of x-rays / CBCTs 
during pregnancy constitutes an additional risk to the foetus. Therefore neither 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 18 of 47 
pregnant women nor women who plan to become pregnant must take part in this 
study. 
The bone biopsy will be retrieved following a minimally invasive procedure during 
conventional dental implant bed preparation. The bone biopsy is retrieved by means of a 
trephine burr with a inner diameter of 2.8 mm during implant bed preparation. The dental 
implant bed preparation is finalized and the dental implant placed according to the protocol. 
Dental implants can improve the bite and chewing ability, as well as the aesthetics and the 
feeling to have natural teeth. In addition, the subject can profit from an intensive and regular 
dental care as participant. 
6.2 
Comparators 
All comparators used in this study are CE marked. The Sponsor supplies the products. 
Geistlich Bio-Oss® 
The control device is Geistlich Bio-Oss® spongiosa granules (Geistlich Pharma AG, 
Wolhusen, Switzerland), 0.25-1 mm in diameter. It’s a natural bone mineral of bovine origin. 
It shall be used according to the instructions of the manufacturer. 
6.3 
Additionall products used in the study 
Geistlich Bio-Gide® 
Geistlich Bio-Gide® is a pure collagen matrix. The collagen is extracted from veterinary 
certified pigs and is carefully purified. It shall be used according to the instructions of the 
manufacturer. 
6.4 
Device Accountability 
The investigator has to confirm the receipt of the study products and ensures secure and 
proper storage. After treatment of the last subject, remaining study products that have not 
been used in the study should be returned to the Sponsor or destroyed on site according to 
the sites standard procedures. The investigator should maintain accountability records of all 
study products received, used, and returned during the course of the study. 
6.5 
Device Complaints 
Defects in the investigational devices should be reported to the Sponsor by the investigator 
immediately upon discovery. 
Defects in the comparators should be reported by the investigator to the manufacturer of the 
comparators. 
7 
Study Procedures 
7.1 
Informed Consent 
It is the responsibility of the investigator, or a person designated by the investigator (if 
acceptable by local regulations), to obtain written informed consent from each subject 
participating in this study, after adequate explanation of the aims, methods, anticipated 
benefits and potential hazards of the study. The investigator will also explain to each subject 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 19 of 47 
any alternative procedures. The investigator or designee must also explain that the subjects 
are completely free to refuse to enter the study or to withdraw from it at any time, for any 
reason and that they will be offered an alternative treatment related to their dental condition. 
Subjects will be advised of the need for the prescribed follow-up visits for their ongoing care 
and well-being and for the collection of relevant study data. All subjects must be willing to 
return to the clinical centre to complete such visits. The written informed consent has to be 
obtained from all subjects before any study related procedures are performed. This 
Institutional Review Board (IRB)/ Ethics Committee (IEC) approved consent form must be 
signed and dated by the subject and the investigator. If the investigator intend to start with 
any study related procedure on the same day the subject signed the informed consent, the 
investigator and the subject have to indicate the exact time of the informed consent on the 
informed consent form. 
If new safety information results in significant changes in the risk/benefit assessment, the 
consent form should be reviewed and updated if necessary. All subjects (including those 
already being treated) should be informed on the new information, given a copy of the 
revised form and give their consent to continue in the study. 
Investigators should keep one original signed informed consent document in the 
investigators file or the CRF folder and hand out a second signed informed consent 
document to the subject. 
7.2 
Pregnancy Test 
Women of childbearing potential (women who are not surgically sterile or postmenopausal 
defined as amenorrhea for >12 months) must perform a pregnancy test (urine based) during 
screening. The test result must be documented in the source data. 
During the study it is recommended to use highly effective contraceptive method (failure rate 
less than 1% per year) such as injectable, combined oral contraceptives or hormonal 
intrauterine devices (IUDs).  
7.3 
Demographics 
Subject demographics, including age, gender, and race/ethnicity, will be documented at the 
screening visit. 
7.4 
Medical History & Dental History 
The dental history & medical history has to be obtained at the screening visit. It should 
include dental status information including extraction socket position according to FDI and 
description of opposing and adjacent dentition.  
Oral hygiene assessment could be performed according to the standard of care at the site 
(although it is not mandatory, it is recommended to use the Full Mouth Plaque Index (PI) 
according to O’Leary et al. 197222 and the Full Mouth Bleeding on Probing (BoP) Index 
according to Ainamo and Bay 1975.23).  
Full mouth PI (O’Leary et al. 1972) should be measured on each single tooth mesial, distal, 
facial and lingual with the following formula: 
 
Percentage of total surfaces with plaque 
 
No. of surfaces with plaque x 100 
Total no. of surfaces 
= 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 20 of 47 
 
 
Full mouth BoP (Ainamo and Bay 1975) should be measured on each single tooth mesial, 
distal, facial and lingual with the following formula: 
 
 
 
Current diseases will be evaluated by the investigator based on the information available 
(letter from general physician or oral communication with the subject).  
7.5 
Inclusion / Exclusion Criteria 
See 5.1. and 5.2 
7.6 
Cone Beam CT 
In order to perform radiographic measurements of the residual bone height a cone beam 
computed topography (CBCT) not older than 12 months should be available. Dental cone 
beam CT scan (CBCT) technique provides a 3-dimensional view of the area of interest and 
therefore offers sufficient information on sinus anatomy to plan for sinus floor elevation.  
7.7 
Adverse Events (please see section 9. Definitions of Adverse Events and Device 
deficiencies (from ISO 14155)) 
Any adverse event must be documented at each study visit until the end of the study. 
7.8 
Concomitant Medications 
Any concomitant medication as well as changes in the concomitant medication, procedures, 
or supportive therapies must be documented at each study visit (except vist 1) until the end 
of the study. 
7.9 
Randomization 
Subjects will be randomized either to the test group receiving Straumann® VivOss™ or 
comparator group receiving Geistlich Bio-Oss®. The master randomization list will be kept in 
a secure repository in the office of the Sponsor.The study centers have to contact the 
Sponsor by email or phone to request randomization of a subject, the Sponsor will send a 
randomization form including randomization details via email or fax. Although this study is not 
blinded, no access to the randomization list will be available to the study centre, the external 
Monitors, the subjects and the Straumann non-Clinical-Research project team. 
Site/s of Biopsy 
The site of biopsy in each sinus depends on the number of implants to be placed in the 
sinus. If more than one implant will be placed the most preferred site will be position 6, 
followed by position 5, followed by position 7, the least preferred position is position 4.  
Percentage of total surfaces bleeding 
 
No. of surfaces bleeding x 100 
Total no. of surfaces 
= 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 21 of 47 
If more than one implant is placed, the investigator should take 2 biopsies following the 
preference list above. The second biopsy should be taken as backup in case the first biopsy 
cannot be evaluated.  
Bilateral Sinus Floor Augmentation 
If a patient needs augmentation in both sinus, one sinus is randomised as study sinus. If the 
sinus is randomized into test group and receives Straumann® VivOss™, the opposite sinus 
should be augmented with Geistlich Bio-Oss® and vice versa. In bilateral patients biopsies 
should be taken from both sinus according to the instructions above.  
7.10 Augmentation 
The Sponsor recommends to follow the lateral window technique as described in the ITI 
Treatment Guide Volume 5 (2011). A collagen membrane Geistlich Bio-Oss® should be used 
to stabilize the bone window, this membrane should cover the complete window and should 
not consist of several pieces. Afterwards the gingiva should close the wound completely and 
should be sutured without any tension.  
7.11 Secondary Inclusion criteria 
See 5.3. 
7.12 Intra-oral Photographs 
Digital intra-oral photographs in raw-format should be taken at each study visit to document 
the procedures: 
Visit 2: At surgery visit the investigator should take the following lateral pictures:  
- 
before surgery  
- 
before removing the window  
- 
open sinus 
- 
filled sinus  
- 
window back in place 
- 
membrane placed on window 
- 
after suture 
Visit 3: Lateral pictures: 
- 
wound before suture removal 
- 
wound after suture removal 
Visit 4: vertical pictures: 
- 
open flap 
- 
after biopsy 
- 
before implant placement 
- 
implant placed flap open 
- 
after suture 
Visit 5: vertical pictures 
- 
wound before suture removal 
- 
wound after suture removal 
Visit 6: vertical pictures 
- 
before loading 
- 
after loading 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 22 of 47 
Photographs should be labelled as below for easy identification of the subject: 
 
Study CR 03/13: 0313 
 
Visit number: _V1 
 
Patient No.: _01 25 
 
e.g.  0313_V1_0125  
 
0313_V3_0205 
7.13 Suture removal 
Sutures should be removed according to the standard of care at the clinic.  
7.14 Biopsy 
The bone biopsies are retrieved in both the test and the comparator group.  
The bone biopsies will be retrieved from the central part of the dental implant osteotomy and 
will be processed together with the trephine burr. The biopsies will be immersed and fixed in 
buffered formalin. Further processing of the biopsy and evaluation of the histologies is 
described in detail in a separate technical procedure protocol. The biopsy-samples will be 
labelled with: 
 
Patient number 
 
Position (FDI) 
7.15 All biopsy-samples will be analysed centrally in Zürich, Switzerland. Implant 
placement 
After the biopsy the study center should follow their standard of care regarding implant bed 
preparation and implant placement. The details of the used implant have to be documented.  
7.16 Wound healing assessment 
Wound healing details have to be documented.  
7.17 Periapical x-rays 
A periapical x-ray has to be taken to document the success of the implant in regards to 
radiolucency. 
7.18 Implant survival 
Implant survival has to be documented 
7.19 Implant success 
An implant will be deemed a success if all of the following success criteria (according to 
Buser et al 199224) apply: 
 Absence of persisting subjective discomfort such as pain, foreign body perception and or 
dysaesthesia (painful sensation) 
 Absence of a recurrent peri-implant infection with suppuration (where an infection is 
termed recurrent if it is observed at two or more follow-up visits after treatment with 
systemic antibiotics) 
 Absence of implant mobility on manual palpation 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 23 of 47 
 Absence of any continuous peri-implant radiolucency  
8 
Study conduct 
8.1 
Visit Windows 
The goal should always be to keep the given time point of each visit. However the time 
windows given below are the limits to be kept to perform according to the protocol. 
Visit 0 
Visit 1 
Visit 2 
Visit 3 
Visit 4 
Visit 5 
Visit 6 
  
Screening 
Visit 
  
Wound 
healing 
assessment 
Implant 
placement 
Wound 
healing 
assessment 
Initial implant 
loading 
Informed 
Consent 
Sinus 
elevation 
  
(Baseline) 
  
  
28-2 days 
before 
screening 
14-0 days 
before 
Baseline 
Day 0 
Day 7-14 
6 months ± 7 
days 
2 weeks after 
visit 4 
4 months ± 1 month 
after visit 4 
 
8.2 
Screening Failures 
Any subject that has signed the informed consent form, is not randomized and does not 
receive the study device is considered a screening failure. In the event of a screening failure, 
the case report forms should be completed up to the visit when the subject was determined 
to be a screening failure. The “study termination form” should also be completed and a new 
subject should be recruited if the recruitment period is ongoing. 
In case of a screening failure according to an eligibility criterion that may be re-evaluated at a 
later time point (e.g. oral hygiene), a re-screening of the patient is possible as judged by the 
investigator if the recruitment period is ongoing. In this case, a “re-screening form” should be 
completed instead of the “study termination form”. 
8.3 
Subject Completion / Withdrawal 
It is possible that a subject may withdraw from the study at any time without prejudice and 
will be offered an alternative treatment for his/her dental condition. Subjects will be advised 
of the need for the prescribed follow-up visits for their ongoing care, well-being, and 
collection of relevant study data. All subjects must agree to return to the clinic to complete 
these follow-up visits. 
The investigator may withdraw any subject from the study in the case of: 
 
non-compliance with the protocol 
 
a serious adverse event or an adverse event, in the opinion of the investigator, which 
prevents the subject’s further participation in the study. 
If a subject is withdrawn from the study as outlined above, the subject must be followed for 
reporting of adverse events. Withdrawn subjects will be followed according to the standard of 
care at the study centre. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 24 of 47 
8.4 
Subject Replacement Policy 
For any subject who for any reason drops out of the per-protocol population a new subject 
with a new number should be allocated if the recruitment period is ongoing. 
8.5 
Missed Visits 
In the event a subject misses a visit, the subject should be recalled as soon as possible. At a 
minimum, the subject should be contacted twice to reschedule. If the subject is not reached 
by telephone, a certified letter should be sent to the subject. The study monitor should be 
contacted to discuss options for the subject’s continuation in the study. If all attempts to 
contact the subject have failed, the subject should be considered lost to follow-up and the 
“Study Termination Form” should be completed.  
8.6 
Protocol Deviations 
Deviations from the procedures established in the protocol are not permitted. If a deviation 
occurs, the study monitor must be contacted immediately. The deviation must be 
documented and investigated. A written statement from the investigator on whether the 
deviation will affect the integrity of the study will be required. 
Any deviation from the protocol (including deviations of the visit dates) may jeopardise the 
study outcome. Non-compliance of the subjects as well as of the investigators may lead to 
the closure of the respective centre. 
9 
Definitions of Adverse Events and Device Deficiencies (from ISO 14155) 
9.1 
Investigational medical device 
Medical device being assessed for safety or performance in a clinical investigation 
NOTE: This includes medical devices already on the market that are being evaluated for new 
intended uses, new populations, new materials or design changes. 
9.2 
Adverse Event (AE) 
Any untoward medical occurrence, unintended disease or injury or any untoward clinical 
signs (including an abnormal laboratory finding) in subjects, users or other persons whether 
or not related to the investigational medical device. 
NOTE 1: This includes events related to the investigational device or the comparator. 
NOTE 2: This includes events related to the procedures involved (any procedure in the 
clinical investigation plan). 
NOTE 3: For users or other persons this is restricted to events related to the investigational 
medical device. 
9.3 
Expected adverse events 
The following adverse events (irrespective of relatedness) can be expected: 
 General risks that exist with dental surgical procedures: Bleeding and bruising, pain and 
swelling after the surgical procedure. Infections in the soft and hard tissue, delayed 
healing, recession of the gum and/or bone, temporary or permanent nerve damage in the 
jaw, oro-sinus or oro-nasal fistulas and possible rejection are very rare. 
 The following are examples of complications that can generally occur with a surgical 
procedure using implants and can therefore not be completely ruled out: 
o Slight pain and tenderness the first days after surgery 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 25 of 47 
o Slight swelling and redness the first days after surgery 
 Gingival inflammation (oral hygiene dependent): Oral hygiene instructions are given and 
oral hygiene procedures performed to prevent gingival inflammation. The occurrence of 
gingival inflammation will be monitored by means of the modified gingival index and if it 
occurs the investigator will provide treatment as needed and repeat oral hygiene 
instructions. 
 General risks that exist with a surgical procedure using barrier membranes and can 
therefore not be completely ruled out: soft tissue dehiscence (tissue damage), 
haematoma, pain, increased sensitivity and redness due to inflammation. 
In regard to wound healing assessments only clinically significant symptoms that are outside 
the normally accepted range (as judged by the clinician) will be reported as adverse events. 
This includes, but not restricts to: 
 
Excessive or progressively increasing pain or discomfort 
 
Excessive swelling 
 
Signs of infection (e.g. suppuration) 
 
Wound / soft tissue breakdown (e.g. soft tissue necrosis, flap dehiscence) 
 
Any other condition or observation deemed outside of the normal range of healing 
characteristics 
9.4 
Serious Adverse Event (SAE) 
Adverse event that: 
a) led to a death, 
b) led to a serious deterioration in health that either: 
1) resulted in a life-threatening illness or injury, or 
2) resulted in a permanent impairment of a body structure or a body function, or 
3) required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or 
4) resulted in medical or surgical intervention to prevent life threatening illness or injury or 
permanent impairment to a body structure or a body function.  
c) led to fetal distress, fetal death or a congenital abnormality or birth defect. 
NOTE 1: This includes device deficiencies that might have led to a serious adverse event if 
a) suitable action had not been taken or b) intervention had not been made or c) if 
circumstances had been less fortunate. These are handled under the SAE reporting system. 
NOTE 2: A planned hospitalization for pre-existing condition, or a procedure required by the 
Clinical Investigation Plan, without a serious deterioration in health, is not considered to be a 
serious adverse event. 
9.5 
Adverse Device Effect (ADE) 
Adverse event related to the use of an investigational medical device. 
NOTE 1- This includes any adverse event resulting from insufficiencies or inadequacies in 
the instructions for use, the deployment, the implantation, the installation, the operation, or 
any malfunction of the investigational medical device. 
NOTE 2- This includes any event that is a result of a use error or intentional misuse. 
9.6 
Serious Adverse Device Effect (SADE) 
Adverse device effect that has resulted in any of the consequences characteristic of a 
serious adverse event. 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 26 of 47 
9.7 
Unanticipated Serious Adverse Device Effect (USADE) 
Serious adverse device effect which by its nature, incidence, severity or outcome has not 
been identified in the current version of the risk analysis report. 
NOTE: Anticipated: an effect which by its nature, incidence, severity or outcome has been 
previously identified in the risk analysis report 
9.8 
Device deficiency 
Inadequacy of a medical device related to its identity, quality, durability, reliability, safety or 
performance, such as malfunction, misuse or use error and inadequate labelling. 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 27 of 47 
9.9 
Assessment of Adverse Events 
Each adverse event should be assessed according to the categorization charts for Adverse 
Events and Device deficiencies (from ISO 14155). 
 
Figure 2: Adverse event categorization chart (from ISO 14155) 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 28 of 47 
 
Figure 3: Device deficiency categorization chart (from ISO 14155) 
9.10 Severity of Adverse Events 
Each adverse event should be assessed for its severity, or the intensity of an event 
experienced by a subject, using the following: 
 Mild – discomfort noticed, but no disruption in daily activities 
 Moderate – discomfort sufficient enough to reduce or affect normal daily activity 
 Severe – Inability to work or perform normal daily activity 
9.11 AE Reporting 
In case of an occurrence of an AE an AE Form in the CRF must be filled out within 
reasonable time. Occurred AEs must be addressed at the next monitoring visit. An annual 
safety report should be created and send to the EC by the Sponsor. 
9.12 SAE Reporting 
If an SAE bears an imminent risk of death, serious injury, or serious illness and that requires 
prompt remedial action for other patients/subjects, users or other it has to be reported 
immediately (max. 2 days). 
Any other reportable event related to the medical device under investigation or due to study 
related procedures must be reported within 7 days. 
All SAEs must be reported via the SAE reporting form (which will be provided by the 
Sponsor) according to MEDDEV 2.7/3 (Dec. 2010). 
The investigator should notify the Sponsor within 24 hours of first learning of the serious 
adverse event. 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 29 of 47 
Contact address: 
Clinical Research, Institut Straumann AG 
Phone: 0041 61 965 11 11 
Fax: 0041 61 965 11 10 
 
The monitor may be required to collect further information for a final evaluation of the event. 
While the Sponsor is responsible for interactions with Health Authorities and Ethics 
Committees, it is the duty of the local investigator to keep the Sponsor informed. 
It is recognized that in many cases SAEs will be treated in a medical rather than a dental 
environment and the investigator may not have immediate knowledge of the event. Close 
contact to the subjects should help to get relevant information in a timely manner. The 
investigator should report any SAE as soon as he has knowledge of the event within the 
above time frame irrespective of when the actual event occurred. 
9.13 Monitoring / Follow-up of Subjects with Adverse Events 
Any AE that occurs in the course of this study must be monitored and followed up until one or 
more of the following have occurred: 
 
The AE is resolved 
 
Pathological laboratory findings have returned to normal 
 
Steady state has been achieved 
It is the responsibility of the Sponsor to cooperate with the Investigator to assure that any 
necessary additional therapeutic measure and follow-up procedures are performed. 
9.14 Pregnancy 
If a female subject becomes pregnant during the course of the study, the study visits should 
be completed as scheduled. Any study assessments that could potentially interfere with the 
pregnancy should be avoided until after the pregnancy (e.g. CBCTs, radiographs, etc.). The 
pregnancy should be recorded as an adverse event, whereas the start of pregnancy will be 
recorded as the start date of the AE and the date of child birth will be recorded as the end 
date. 
10 Statistical Procedures 
The statistical analysis principles described below will be supplemented by a detailed 
statistical analysis plan (SAP) which will be written after the first patients have performed visit 
2 and will be finalized, based on the findings of the data review meeting, before the database 
is locked. 
10.1 Statistical Analysis 
The statistical analysis will be performed by an external partner. 
Descriptive summary statistics will be computed for all parameters documented on the case 
report form (CRF). Quantitative parameters will be described by seven-point scales with 
mean, standard deviation, median, quartiles, minimum and maximum. For qualitative 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 30 of 47 
variables absolute and relative frequencies will be given. All descriptions will be done 
separately for treatment groups and visits. 
The data of both study centres will be pooled. Pooling is justified by applying a high degree 
of standardization of study procedures and investigator training. 
10.2 Statistical Hypotheses 
The primary endpoint of this study is the histological evaluation of the ratio of newly formed 
bone to residual bone graft in Straumann® VivOss™ compared to Geistlich Bio-Oss® at visit 
4 (6 month ± 7 days, after sinus elevation).  
In this study the following hypothesis will be tested 
Straumann® VivOss™ combined with Bio-Gide shows a significantly higher ratio of newly 
formed bone to residual bone graft compared to Geistlich Bio-Oss® combined with 
GeistlichBio-Gide at visit 4 (6 month ± 7 days, after sinus elevation).  
 
T: Test Group 
 
C: Comparator Group 
 
Testing for Superiority (based on the per protocol (PP) data set): 
H0S: 
𝑇 = 𝐶 
H1S: 
𝑇 ≠𝐶 
H0S is the null hypothesis, claiming that there is no difference in the true mean of ratio of 
newly formed bone to residual bone graft after 6 months between the test group and the 
negative control group  
H1S is the alternative hypothesis claiming that the true mean change of ratio of newly formed 
bone to residual bone graft after 6 months is unequal in the two treatment groups; either 
higher or lower in the test group than in the negative control group. 
T 
is the true mean at 6 months of the ratio of newly formed bone to residual bone graft in 
the test group. 
C 
is the true mean at 6 months of the ratio of newly formed bone to residual bone graft in 
the control group. 
The secondary efficacy variables in this clinical study are: 
 Survival rate of study implants evaluated at visit 6 (initial implant loading) 
 Success rate of study implants evaluated at visit 6 (initial implant loading) 
 
10.3 Sample Size Calculation 
Sample size calculations were performed for a clinical relevant difference between test and 
comparator across a given range of standard deviations, and with the two-sided unpaired t-
test under a significance level α =5% and with a power β = 80%. 
a) Sample Size for Test to Show Superiority of Test Group vs. Control Group  

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 31 of 47 
Based on a recent pre-clinical study a difference of the means of the ratio of newly formed 
bone to residual bone graft of approximately 0.4 can be expected in favour of the test 
treatment compared to the control. Considering a common standard deviation of 0.5, 25 
subjects per group would be necessary to confirm this clinically relevant difference 
statistically. 
Table 1: Sample size for superiority based on ∆ = 0.4: 
Common SD [mm] 
0.425 
0.45 
0.475 
0.5 
0.525 
0.55 
0.575 
n Test 
18 
20 
23 
25 
28 
30 
33 
n Control 
18 
20 
23 
25 
28 
30 
33 
 
10.4 Populations for Analysis 
10.4.1 Per Protocol Set (PP) 
Randomized subjects who terminated the study and in whom no major protocol violations 
have been observed. 
10.4.2 Full Analysis Set (FA) 
This data set will include all randomized subjects who have received at least one study 
device and from whom at least one measurement of post randomization data is available. It 
will include subjects even with major protocol violations and premature termination. The FA 
Set includes the PP Set. 
10.4.3 Safety Analysis Set (SA) 
This data set will include all subjects who have received at least one study device. The SA 
Set includes the FA Set. 
10.4.4 Not Treated (NT) 
Subjects enrolled in the study who did not receive the study device will be excluded from the 
analysis. 
10.4.5 Final Analysis 
An interim analysis will not be performed. The final analysis of all endpoints will be performed 
at the end of the study. 
11 Data Management 
11.1.1 Data Collection 
Data should be recorded on the appropriate Case Report Form (CRF) for all study subjects 
from whom informed consent is obtained, and no study treatment should be administered 
without written informed consent. CRFs will be retrieved by the study monitor during the 
monitoring visits and subsequently sent to the data manager. Incoming data will be reviewed 
to identify inconsistent and/or missing data. Data problems will be addressed by written 
queries to the site. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 32 of 47 
11.1.2 Case Report Forms 
Standardized CRFs will be provided by the Sponsor to the site. The investigator is 
responsible for completion of the CRFs in a timely manner and should be up to date with the 
documentation before each monitoring visit. 
11.1.3 Data Entry and Management 
All original CRFs will be retrieved from the site by the study monitor and sent to the data 
management. Double data entry and computer programmed error checks will be carried out 
by data management personnel. The investigator will be queried on issues concerning 
completeness and consistency. 
All above mentioned tasks will be carried out according to Straumann Standard Operating 
Procedures, except for those tasks performed by Straumann contracted Contract Research 
Organizations (CRO), where the CRO procedures shall be used.  
12 Regulatory and Ethical Requirements 
12.1 Basic requirements 
The principal investigator/co-investigator shall confirm the eligibility of the subject by the 
screening test and confirm the conformity to the inclusion/exclusion criteria at the subject 
enrolment. 
Also, the principal investigator/co-investigator shall keep knowledge about the subject’s 
health condition by retaining the communication path to the subject for the emergency during 
the follow-up period, etc. Also, he/she shall make an effort to collect and transfer the safety 
information relevant to the investigational device with the cooperation of the relevant peoples 
involved to this study. In case of the occurrence of the adverse event, the principal 
investigator/co-investigator shall provide an appropriate treatment to ensure the subject’s 
safety. 
A Sponsor shall collect and examine information that is necessary for properly conducting a 
clinical trial, with respect to matters concerning the quality, efficacy, and safety of the 
investigational device and provide the head of the medical institution with such information. 
Whenever the Sponsor finds any of the items such as disease, injury or death suspected due 
to adverse device effect, infection due to the investigational device or other events relates to 
the effectiveness or safety of the investigational device, Sponsor shall promptly notify the 
principal investigator and the head of the medical institution thereof. 
12.2 Informed Consent 
Each subject will be informed by the investigator of the overall requirements/procedures of 
the study after explaining the purposes of the study, the nature of the planned treatment and 
alternative procedures. In addition, he/ she will explain any risks, possible complications and 
benefits of the proposed treatment. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved consent 
form will be provided by the Sponsor. 
The informed consent form will be valid only after it is dated and bears the name and 
signature of the principal investigator/co-investigator and subject. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 33 of 47 
The principal investigator/co-investigator shall provide the copy of it after it is dated and 
bears the name signature of the principal investigator/co-investigator and subject. 
The informed consent document is written in accordance with the “Declaration of Helsinki” 
(as adopted by the 18th World Medical Assembly, 1964, and as revised in Tokyo (1975), 
Venice (1983), Hong Kong (1989), South Africa (1996), Edinburgh (2000), Washington 
(2002), Tokyo (2004) and Seoul (2008). 
When the principal investigator/co-investigator obtained any information that might influence 
the subject's intent to participate in the clinical trial, the principal investigator/co-investigator 
shall promptly give such information to the subject, document the communication of the 
information, and confirm whether the subject is willing to continue his or her participation in 
the clinical trial.  
The principal investigator, in such cases as stipulated under the preceding paragraph, shall 
revise the explanatory documents without delay whenever it is deemed necessary. 
When the explanatory documents are revised pursuant to the preceding paragraph, the 
principal investigator shall report the fact to the head of the medical institution and obtain the 
subject's consent to continue his or her participation in the clinical trial.  
12.3 Institutional Review Board / Ethics Committee 
Prior to initiation of any study procedures, the protocol, sample of CRF, explanatory 
documents and informed consent form will be submitted to an IRB or Ethics Committee for 
review and approval from the viewpoint of ethical, scientific and medical appropriateness. In 
addition, any amendments to the protocol or informed consent must be reviewed and 
approved by the IRB or Ethics Committee. The Sponsor must receive a letter documenting 
the IRB / Ethics Committee approval at the clinical site prior to the initiation of the study. 
The investigator is responsible for providing the appropriate reports to the IRB or Ethics 
Committee during the course of the clinical study. 
12.4 Regulatory Compliance 
This study will be performed in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki, ISO 14155, this 
protocol and the relevant local regulations and laws. 
13 Study Management  
13.1 Reports and Record Management 
13.1.1 Investigator Records 
The investigator will receive an investigator file with all required study documents, including 
the instructions for use, protocol, CRF, informed consent, study contract and confidentiality 
agreement, insurance certificate, IRB/ IEC approval, CV of investigator and various other 
documents. Prior to the initiation of the study the investigator has to provide several 
documents including a signed confidentiality agreement, the curriculum vitae of the 
investigator(s), a signed copy of the final protocol and any amendments, a signed copy of the 
clinical study agreement with the Sponsor and various other documents on request. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 34 of 47 
13.1.2 Case Report Forms 
The investigator shall supply the Sponsor on request with any required background data from 
the study documentation or any other clinical records. This is particularly important when 
errors in data transcription are suspected. The investigator will be responsible for the 
accuracy of the data entered in the case report form. All entries must be written in black or 
blue ink and all deletions, additions or changes must be initialled and dated (additional 
information sheet on how to fill out the CRF). The forms must be available for review/ 
collection to designated Straumann representatives at each scheduled monitoring visit. The 
investigator will also allow the Straumann representative and/ or regulatory bodies to review 
the data reported in the CRFs with the source documents as far as is permitted by local 
regulations and provided that the subject confidentiality is protected. 
13.1.3 Source Documents 
Source documents are defined as the original point of entry of a specific data point. Source 
documents will include, but are not limited to, progress notes, electronic data, computer 
printouts, radiographs, and recorded data from automated instruments. Certain data 
recorded in the CRF can be considered as source data. In this study the following data 
recorded in the CRF can be considered as source data: Full Mouth Plaque Index (PI) 
according to O’Leary et al. 1972 and the Full Mouth Bleeding on Probing (BoP) Index 
according to Ainamo and Bay 1975. All source documents pertaining to this study will be 
maintained by the investigator and made available for inspection by authorized persons and 
for source data verification during monitoring visits. 100% of source data verification will be 
performed on critical variables. Besides of general information the investigator has to 
document each and every requested data point of the CRF/protocol first in his source data. 
The transcription of these source data into the CRF might be done later by the investigator or 
authorized designee. 
13.1.4 Records/data Retention 
Originals of the radiographs, casts, or other items and originals of the study records and 
clinical data forms will be maintained by the study monitor in the file established for this 
study. All study documentation (CRFs, Investigators files, subject x-rays and photographs) 
should be kept at the study site after the study is completed for at least 15 years following the 
completion of the study as determined by the Sponsor. The investigator should be available 
to answer any queries associated with the study during this time. If the investigator is no 
longer working at the site, he is obliged to inform Straumann who will be in charge of the 
archived documents and who is responsible to answer questions once he is not at the site. If 
the documents are moved to another location the investigator must inform Institut Straumann 
AG about the move. All other study records will be kept by Straumann once the study has 
been completed. These records will be maintained at Straumann according to Straumann 
standard operating procedures. 
13.1.5 Subject Data Protection 
The name of the subject as well as all other personal data will be kept under the strict 
confidence by the investigator. If in case for medical reasons, it will be necessary during the 
course of the study to identify the subject this will be done under attention of the medical 
secrecy. The investigator will assure that all CRFs and other documents that will be handed 
out to Institute Straumann AG will not contain any personal subject data. The investigator will 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 35 of 47 
prepare a separate list which will allow the identification of the subject. This list will contain 
subject numbers, initials, names and addresses of the subject and will be filed in the 
investigator’s file. 
During the regular monitoring visits, audits or inspections by the authorities, the subject cards 
will be inspected by authorised persons (e.g. monitors, auditors). These persons are 
committed legally on their secrecy.  
13.2 Quality Control and Assurance 
13.2.1 Monitoring (general aspects) 
Straumann will assign a qualified individual to monitor the study. The general monitoring 
procedures for this study are described below. In general the monitor has to follow the 
applicable laws and guidelines during all monitoring activities. 
The monitor will be responsible for determining and documenting that each investigator 
clearly understands and accepts the responsibilities and obligations of conducting a clinical 
study. 
It is understood that the responsible Straumann monitor (or designee) will contact and visit 
the investigator regularly and will be allowed, on request, to inspect the various records of 
the trial including the CRFs and other pertinent data, provided that the subject confidentiality 
is maintained in accord with local requirements. 
It will be the monitor’s responsibility to inspect the CRFs at regular intervals throughout the 
study, to verify the adherence to the protocol and the completeness, consistency and 
accuracy of the data being entered on them. The monitor will need to have access to storage 
locations of study devices and study supplies, to treatment/examination rooms and rooms 
where any study related activity takes place, and to all records associated with the study as 
well as to all other original patient records/source documents to verify the entries on the 
CRF. The investigator (or his/her deputy) agrees to cooperate with the monitor to ensure that 
any problem detected in the course of these monitoring visits is resolved. 
13.2.2 Pre-study Visit 
The main purpose of the pre-study visit is to conduct a detailed discussion of the planned 
study, based on the draft protocol and eCRF/CRF (if available). If initially only a general 
outline exists and development of a study protocol largely depends on substantial input from 
the investigator, all relevant information has to be obtained in the pre-study phase to allow for 
the writing of the protocol and the designing of the eCRF/CRF. 
13.2.3 Study Initiation Visit  
If the required documentation including the insurance certificate, the devices and all study 
supplies as well as the IEC approval and the approval of the authorities (if applicable) are on 
file/on site, the monitor is allowed to perform the study initiation visit. The investigator(s), co-
investigator(s) and all persons to whom the investigator has delegated significant study-
related duties should be present for the initiation visit. The investigator(s), co-investigator(s) 
or any other persons to whom the investigator has delegated significant study-related duties 
are not allowed to perform any subject related action before the study initiation visit. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 36 of 47 
The monitor will address issues regarding the performance of the study with focus on the 
responsibilities of the investigator and co-workers during the initiation visit in detail with all 
persons involved, if not previously discussed and documented. 
13.2.4 Routine Monitoring Visits 
Monitoring visits will be scheduled and conducted periodically. 
 
The protocol is being properly followed 
 
The IECs and authorities approved or has been notified of any protocol changes 
 
Informed consent has been obtained for each and every subject before any subject 
related activity 
 
Accurate, complete, and current records are being maintained, and the information 
recorded on the CRFs is representative of the subject’s record and other source data 
(source document verification) 
 
Accurate, complete, and timely adverse event and serious adverse event reporting is 
followed 
 
The reason for a subject’s withdrawal has been documented 
 
Reports are being submitted to the IEC, authorities and to the Sponsor 
 
The appropriate staff is carrying out the study activities 
 
All logs are valid and up-to-date 
 
Study devices and study supplies are stored and accounted correctly 
 
etc. 
The investigator must provide to the Sponsor and/or representative the necessary study 
records for a thorough review of the study’s progress.  
At monitoring visits radiographs, CRFs, photographs, casts and other study documents might 
be collected. 
13.2.5 Close out Visit 
All routine monitoring functions must be completed prior to the study termination visit. During 
this last scheduled visit the monitor will also focus on the responsibilities of the investigator 
after the study is closed. The site should have answered any open query before the monitor 
schedules this visit, and the database (if not already closed) should be cleaned and locked. 
The monitor has to follow-up the finalization of all study logs and has to prepare copies of all 
documents necessary for the TMF as well as final check the IF for completeness. The 
monitor should prepare the IF and CRF in a matter that allows the investigator easy 
archiving. 
13.2.6 Study Termination 
The study can be discontinued early at the discretion of the principle investigator or the 
Sponsor in the case of any of the following: 
 
Occurrence of AEs unknown at the start of the study in with respect to their nature, 
severity, and duration, or the unexpected excessive incidence of known AEs 
 
New scientific knowledge obtained after the start of the study showing the ethical 
claim of the study is no longer valid 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 37 of 47 
If the study or a study site is terminated before the aspired end of the study for any reason, 
the investigator should contact all active study subjects. Afterwards the investigator should 
apply the standard of care for implant therapy. 
If the study is temporarily interrupted for any reason the subjects should be treated at the 
discretion of the investigator. Each investigator should take care that none of his subjects 
exceeds the absolute treatment time, unless it is medically indicated. 
In terminating or temporarily interrupting situations, Straumann and the investigator will 
assure the adequate consideration is given to the protection of the subject’s interests. 
13.2.7 Centre discontinuation 
The study centre might be closed and the study terminated under the following 
circumstances: 
 
The centre is not recruiting a sufficient number of subjects or is unlikely to recruit a 
sufficient number of subjects 
 
The centre does not respond to study management requests 
 
Repeated protocol violations have been discovered 
13.2.8 Audits and Inspections 
The study may be audited at any time by Institute Straumann AG or inspected by the 
regulatory authorities. The investigator and his team will make themselves available when 
the auditors or the inspectors are present, giving them access to the site, the study material, 
and to subject files. The investigator should understand that source documents for this trial 
should be made available to appropriately qualified personnel from Straumann or its 
designees or to health authority inspectors after appropriate notification. The verification of 
the CRF data must be by direct inspection of source documents. 
The subjects’ confidentiality must be safeguarded and data checked during the audit should 
remain confidential. 
13.3 Protocol Amendments 
Once the first subject has entered the study, protocol changes will be kept to a minimum. 
Only those changes that are deemed essential to the successful completion of the protocol 
will be considered. 
If changes to the protocol are proposed, they shall be discussed with the study manager in a 
timely manner. IEC approval and Authority approval is required for any change in the 
protocol or in the informed consent that may affect the scientific soundness of the study or 
the right, safety, or welfare of the. The change in the protocol can not be implemented until 
the approvals are obtained. Once the investigator and the Sponsor have accepted the 
changes, a written amendment to the protocol will be sent the investigator for signature. 
Requests for clarification statements to the protocol shall be discussed with the study 
monitor. The clarification statements will be sent to each investigator and will be kept in the 
appropriate file. 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 38 of 47 
13.4 Publications 
The study results are planned to be published. All study results and any new invention or 
discovery and the rights deriving there from shall be owned solely and exclusively by 
Straumann. Analysis of data will be done by Straumann and the final manuscript being 
prepared in conjunction with Institut Straumann AG. Straumann reserves the right to 
comment upon any additional manuscripts intended for publication or public presentation 
which encompass information obtained during clinical studies sponsored or supported by the 
company. Investigator(s) will be requested to submit their final manuscript to Straumann and 
will receive comments from the company within a maximum period of 45 days. 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 39 of 47 
14 AGREEMEEMENT SIGNATURES 
Protocol: 
CR 03/13 
Title: 
A randomized controlled clinical trial to investigate the capability of Straumann® 
VivOss™ compared to Geistlich Bio-Oss in sinus floor augmentation 
Date: 
19 January 2015 
Version: 
6.0 
I have read the forgoing protocol and agree to conduct the study as outlined. I agree that the 
examinations and follow-up visits required by this protocol are in accordance with the 
standard treatment plan for dental implant patients. 
Signatures: 
  
  
 
 
 
 Name of Investigator 
 Signature of Investigator 
 
Date 
(dd/mm/yyyy) 
 
 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 40 of 47 
15 Appendix 
Appendix 1: WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research 
Involving Human Subjects 
 
Adopted by the 18th WMA General Assembly, Helsinki, Finland, June 1964, and 
amended by the: 
29th WMA General Assembly, Tokyo, Japan, October 1975 
35th WMA General Assembly, Venice, Italy, October 1983 
41st WMA General Assembly, Hong Kong, September 1989 
48th WMA General Assembly, Somerset West, Republic of South Africa, 
October 1996 
52nd WMA General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000  
53rd WMA General Assembly, Washington 2002 (Note of Clarification on 
paragraph 29 added) 
55th WMA General Assembly, Tokyo 2004 (Note of Clarification on Paragraph 
30 added) 
59th WMA General Assembly, Seoul, October 2008 
 
A.     INTRODUCTION 
1. The World Medical Association (WMA) has developed the Declaration of Helsinki 
as a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, 
including research on identifiable human material and data. 
    The Declaration is intended to be read as a whole and each of its constituent 
paragraphs should not be applied without consideration of all other relevant 
paragraphs. 
2. Although the Declaration is addressed primarily to physicians, the WMA 
encourages other participants in medical research involving human subjects to adopt 
these principles. 
3. It is the duty of the physician to promote and safeguard the health of patients, 
including those who are involved in medical research. The physician's knowledge 
and conscience are dedicated to the fulfilment of this duty. 
4. The Declaration of Geneva of the WMA binds the physician with the words, "The 
health of my patient will be my first consideration," and the International Code of 
Medical Ethics declares that, "A physician shall act in the patient's best interest when 
providing medical care." 
5. Medical progress is based on research that ultimately must include studies 
involving human subjects. Populations that are underrepresented in medical research 
should be provided appropriate access to participation in research. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 41 of 47 
6. In medical research involving human subjects, the well-being of the individual 
research subject must take precedence over all other interests. 
7. The primary purpose of medical research involving human subjects is to 
understand the causes, development and effects of diseases and improve preventive, 
diagnostic and therapeutic interventions (methods, procedures and treatments). Even 
the best current interventions must be evaluated continually through research for 
their safety, effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility and quality. 
8. In medical practice and in medical research, most interventions involve risks and 
burdens. 
9. Medical research is subject to ethical standards that promote respect for all human 
subjects and protect their health and rights. Some research populations are 
particularly vulnerable and need special protection. These include those who cannot 
give or refuse consent for themselves and those who may be vulnerable to coercion 
or undue influence. 
10. Physicians should consider the ethical, legal and regulatory norms and standards 
for research involving human subjects in their own countries as well as applicable 
international norms and standards. No national or international ethical, legal or 
regulatory requirement should reduce or eliminate any of the protections for research 
subjects set forth in this Declaration. 
  
B.     PRINCIPLES FOR ALL MEDICAL RESEARCH 
11. It is the duty of physicians who participate in medical research to protect the life, 
health, dignity, integrity, right to self-determination, privacy, and confidentiality of 
personal information of research subjects. 
12. Medical research involving human subjects must conform to generally accepted 
scientific principles, be based on a thorough knowledge of the scientific literature, 
other relevant sources of information, and adequate laboratory and, as appropriate, 
animal experimentation. The welfare of animals used for research must be respected. 
13. Appropriate caution must be exercised in the conduct of medical research that 
may harm the environment. 
14. The design and performance of each research study involving human subjects 
must be clearly described in a research protocol. The protocol should contain a 
statement of the ethical considerations involved and should indicate how the 
principles in this Declaration have been addressed. The protocol should include 
information regarding funding, sponsors, institutional affiliations, other potential 
conflicts of interest, incentives for subjects and provisions for treating and/or 
compensating subjects who are harmed as a consequence of participation in the 
research study. The protocol should describe arrangements for post-study access by 
study subjects to interventions identified as beneficial in the study or access to other 
appropriate care or benefits. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 42 of 47 
15. The research protocol must be submitted for consideration, comment, guidance 
and approval to a research ethics committee before the study begins. This committee 
must be independent of the researcher, the sponsor and any other undue influence. 
It must take into consideration the laws and regulations of the country or countries in 
which the research is to be performed as well as applicable international norms and 
standards but these must not be allowed to reduce or eliminate any of the protections 
for research subjects set forth in this Declaration. The committee must have the right 
to monitor ongoing studies. The researcher must provide monitoring information to 
the committee, especially information about any serious adverse events. No change 
to the protocol may be made without consideration and approval by the committee. 
16. Medical research involving human subjects must be conducted only by 
individuals with the appropriate scientific training and qualifications. Research on 
patients or healthy volunteers requires the supervision of a competent and 
appropriately qualified physician or other health care professional. The responsibility 
for the protection of research subjects must always rest with the physician or other 
health care professional and never the research subjects, even though they have 
given consent. 
17. Medical research involving a disadvantaged or vulnerable population or 
community is only justified if the research is responsive to the health needs and 
priorities of this population or community and if there is a reasonable likelihood that 
this population or community stands to benefit from the results of the research. 
18. Every medical research study involving human subjects must be preceded by 
careful assessment of predictable risks and burdens to the individuals and 
communities involved in the research in comparison with foreseeable benefits to 
them and to other individuals or communities affected by the condition under 
investigation. 
19. Every clinical trial must be registered in a publicly accessible database before 
recruitment of the first subject. 
20. Physicians may not participate in a research study involving human subjects 
unless they are confident that the risks involved have been adequately assessed and 
can be satisfactorily managed. Physicians must immediately stop a study when the 
risks are found to outweigh the potential benefits or when there is conclusive proof of 
positive and beneficial results. 
21. Medical research involving human subjects may only be conducted if the 
importance of the objective outweighs the inherent risks and burdens to the research 
subjects. 
22. Participation by competent individuals as subjects in medical research must be 
voluntary. Although it may be appropriate to consult family members or community 
leaders, no competent individual may be enrolled in a research study unless he or 
she freely agrees. 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 43 of 47 
23. Every precaution must be taken to protect the privacy of research subjects and 
the confidentiality of their personal information and to minimize the impact of the 
study on their physical, mental and social integrity. 
24. In medical research involving competent human subjects, each potential subject 
must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible 
conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits 
and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, and any other 
relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of the right to 
refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time 
without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of 
individual potential subjects as well as to the methods used to deliver the information. 
After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the 
physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential 
subject's freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be 
expressed in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and 
witnessed. 
25. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, physicians must 
normally seek consent for the collection, analysis, storage and/or reuse. There may 
be situations where consent would be impossible or impractical to obtain for such 
research or would pose a threat to the validity of the research. In such situations the 
research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics 
committee. 
26. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study the 
physician should be particularly cautious if the potential subject is in a dependent 
relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations the 
informed consent should be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is 
completely independent of this relationship. 
27. For a potential research subject who is incompetent, the physician must seek 
informed consent from the legally authorized representative. These individuals must 
not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it 
is intended to promote the health of the population represented by the potential 
subject, the research cannot instead be performed with competent persons, and the 
research entails only minimal risk and minimal burden. 
28. When a potential research subject who is deemed incompetent is able to give 
assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that 
assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorized representative. The 
potential subject's dissent should be respected. 
29. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving 
consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or 
mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic 
of the research population. In such circumstances the physician should seek 
informed consent from the legally authorized representative. If no such representative 
is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without 
informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 44 of 47 
condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the 
research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. 
Consent to remain in the research should be obtained as soon as possible from the 
subject or a legally authorized representative. 
30. Authors, editors and publishers all have ethical obligations with regard to the 
publication of the results of research. Authors have a duty to make publicly available 
the results of their research on human subjects and are accountable for the 
completeness and accuracy of their reports. They should adhere to accepted 
guidelines for ethical reporting. Negative and inconclusive as well as positive results 
should be published or otherwise made publicly available. Sources of funding, 
institutional affiliations and conflicts of interest should be declared in the publication. 
Reports of research not in accordance with the principles of this Declaration should 
not be accepted for publication. 
C.     ADDITIONAL PRINCIPLES FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH COMBINED WITH 
MEDICAL CARE 
31. The physician may combine medical research with medical care only to the 
extent that the research is justified by its potential preventive, diagnostic or 
therapeutic value and if the physician has good reason to believe that participation in 
the research study will not adversely affect the health of the patients who serve as 
research subjects. 
32. The benefits, risks, burdens and effectiveness of a new intervention must be 
tested against those of the best current proven intervention, except in the following 
circumstances: 
 
The use of placebo, or no treatment, is acceptable in studies where no current proven 
intervention exists; or  
 
Where for compelling and scientifically sound methodological reasons the use of 
placebo is necessary to determine the efficacy or safety of an intervention and the 
patients who receive placebo or no treatment will not be subject to any risk of serious 
or irreversible harm. Extreme care must be taken to avoid abuse of this option.  
33. At the conclusion of the study, patients entered into the study are entitled to be 
informed about the outcome of the study and to share any benefits that result from it, 
for example, access to interventions identified as beneficial in the study or to other 
appropriate care or benefits. 
34. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of the care are related 
to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient's 
decision to withdraw from the study must never interfere with the patient-physician 
relationship. 
35. In the treatment of a patient, where proven interventions do not exist or have 
been ineffective, the physician, after seeking expert advice, with informed consent 
from the patient or a legally authorized representative, may use an unproven 
intervention if in the physician's judgement it offers hope of saving life, re-establishing 
health or alleviating suffering. Where possible, this intervention should be made the 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 45 of 47 
object of research, designed to evaluate its safety and efficacy. In all cases, new 
information should be recorded and, where appropriate, made publicly available.

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 46 of 47 
16 References 
                                               
1 Boyne PJ, James RA.: Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and 
bone. 
J Oral Surg. 1980 Aug;38(8):613-6. 
2 Valentini P, Abensur DJ: Maxillary sinus grafting with anorganic bovine bone: a clinical 
report of long-term results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 Jul-Aug;18(4):556-60. 
3 Zerbo IR, Bronckers AL, de Lange GL, van Beek GJ, Burger EH: Histology of human 
alveolar bone regeneration with a porous tricalcium phosphate. A report of two cases. Clin 
Oral Implants Res. 2001 Aug;12(4):379-84. 
4 Burchardt H.: The biology of bone graft repair. Clin Orthop. 1983 Apr(174):28-42. 
5 Carmagnola D, Berglundh T, Araujo M, Albrektsson T, Lindhe J.: Bone healing around 
implants placed in a jaw defect augmented with Bio-Oss. An experimental study in dogs. J 
Clin Periodontol. 2000 Nov;27(11):799-805. 
6 Fukuta K, Har-Shai Y, Collares MV, Herschman BR, Persiani RJ, Jackson IT: The viability 
of revascularized calvarial bone graft in a pig model. Ann Plast Surg. 1992 Aug;29(2):136-42. 
7 Kahnberg KE, Rasmusson L, Mohammadi S.: An experimental rabbit model for studying the 
healing of onlay bone grafts. Swed Dent J. 1998;22(1-2):15-21. 
8 Hurzeler MB, Quinones CR, Kirsch A, Schupbach P, Krausse A, Strub JR, Caffesse RG: 
Maxillary sinus augmentation using different grafting materials and dental implants in 
monkeys. Part III. Evaluation of autogenous bone combined with porous hydroxyapatite. Clin 
Oral Implants Res. 1997 Oct;8(5):401-11. 
9 Buser D, Ruskin J, Higginbottom F, Hardwick R, Dahlin C, Schenk RK: Osseointegration of 
titanium implants in bone regenerated in membrane-protected defects: a histologic study in 
the canine mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995 Nov-Dec;10(6):666-81. 
10 Nkenke E, Radespiel-Troger M, Wiltfang J, Schultze-Mosgau S, Winkler G, Neukam FW. 
Morbidity of harvesting of retromolar bone grafts: a prospective study. Clin Oral Implants 
Res. 2002 Oct;13(5):514-21. 
11 Kolk A, Handschel J, Drescher W, Rothamel D, Kloss F, Blessmann M, Heiland M, Wolff 
KD, Smeets R. Current trends and future perspectives of bone substitute materials - from 
space holders to innovative biomaterials. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012 Dec;40(8):706-18. 
doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2012.01.002. Epub 2012 Jan 31. 
12 Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Ridge preservation with the use of Bio-Oss collagen: A 6-month 
study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 May;20(5):433-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-
0501.2009.01705.x. 
13 Casado PL, Duarte ME, Carvalho W, Esmeraldo da Silva L, Barboza EP. Ridge bone 
maintenance in human after extraction. Implant Dent. 2010 Aug;19(4):314-22. doi: 
10.1097/ID.0b013e3181dec322. 
14 Zitzmann,N.U.; Naef,R.; Scharer,P. Resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes in 
combination with Bio-Oss for guided bone regeneration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997 
Nov-Dec;12(6):844-52. 
15 Hämmerle CH, Lang NP. Single stage surgery combining transmucosal implant placement 
with guided bone regeneration and bioresorbable materials. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001 
Feb;12(1):9-18. 
16 Mardas N, D’Aiuto F, Mezzomo L, Arzoumanidi M, Donos N. Radiographic alveolar bone 
level changes following ridge preservation with two different biomaterials. Clin Oral Implants 
Res 2011;22(4):416-423. 
17 Cordaro L, Bosshardt DD, Palattella P, Rao W, Serino G, Chiapasco M. Maxillary 
sinus grafting with Bio-Oss or Straumann Bone Ceramic: histomorphometric results  
from a randomized controlled multicenter clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res.  
2008 Aug;19(8):796-803. 
18 Patel K, Mardas N, Donos N. Radiographic and clinical outcomes of implants placed in 
 

 
CR 03/13 
 
Version 6.0 
 
Page 47 of 47 
                                                                                                                                                   
ridge preservation sites: a 12-month post-loading follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res 
2012;[Epub ahead of print]. 
19 Yuan H, Kurashina K, de Bruijn JD, Li Y, de Groot K, Zhang X. A preliminary study on 
osteoinduction of two kinds of calcium phosphate ceramics. Biomaterials 1999;20(19):1799-
1806. 
20 Yuan H, van Blitterswijk CA, de Groot K, de Bruijn JD. A comparison of bone formation in 
biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) and hydroxyapatite (HA) implanted in muscle and bone of 
dogs at different time periods. J Biomed Mater Res A 2006;78(1):139-147. 
21 Yuan H, van Blitterwijk CA, de Groot K, de Bruijn JD. Cross-species comparison of ectopic 
bone formation in biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) and hydroxyapatite (HA) scaffolds. 
Tissue Eng 2006;12(6):1607-1615. 
22 O'Leary,T.J.; Drake,R.B.; Naylor,J.E. The plaque control record. J Periodontol 1972: 43(1): 
38-40 
23 Ainamo J, Bay I. Problems and proposals for recording gingivitis and plaque. Int Dent J. 
1975 Dec;25(4):229-35. 
24 Buser, D, Weber, HP, Brägger, U, Balsinger, C: Gewebeintegration einphasiger ITI-
Implantate: Drei-Jahres-Ergebnisse einer prospektiven Langzeitstudie mit Hohlzylinder- und 
Hohlschraubenimplantaten.