Evaluation of dental implants as a risk factor for the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in breast cancer patients

Peri-implantitis increases the risk of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws associated with osseointegrated implants in rats treated with zoledronate

This study evaluated the peri-implant tissues under normal conditions and under the influence of experimental peri-implantitis (EPI) in osseointegrated implants installed in the maxillae of rats treated with oncologic dosage of zoledronate. Twenty-eight senescent female rats underwent the extraction of the upper incisor and placement of a titanium dental implant (DI). After eight weeks was installated a transmucosal healing screw on DI. After nine weeks, the following groups were formed: VEH, ZOL, VEH-EPI and ZOL-EPI. From the 9th until the 19th, VEH and VEH-EPI groups received vehicle and ZOL and ZOL-EPI groups received zoledronate. At the 14th week, a cotton ligature was installed around the DI in VEH-EPI and ZOL-EPI groups to induce the EPI. At the 19th week, euthanasia was performed, and the maxillae were processed so that at the implanted sites were analyzed: histological aspects and the percentage of total bone tissue (PTBT) and non-vital bone tissue (PNVBT), along with TNFα, IL-1β, VEGF, OCN and TRAP immunolabeling. ZOL group presented mild persistent peri-implant inflammation, higher PNVBT and TNFα and IL-1β immunolabeling, but lower for VEGF, OCN and TRAP in comparison with VEH group. ZOL-EPI group exhibited exuberant peri-implant inflammation, higher PNVBT and TNFα and IL-1β immunolabeling when compared with ZOL and VEH-EPI groups. Zoledronate disrupted peri-implant environment, causing mild persistent inflammation and increasing the quantity of non-vital bone tissue. Besides, associated with the EPI there were an exacerbated inflammation and even greater increase in the quantity of non-vital bone around the DI, which makes this condition a risk factor for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws.

Implant presence-triggered osteonecrosis: A scoping review

Unlike medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), implant presence-triggered osteonecrosis of the jaw (IPTO) is not well appreciated. Recent reports have suggested a mechanical aetiology unique to osseointegrated dental implants that may be responsible for this phenomenon. A scoping review was performed to consolidate the available evidence. Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. Studies that described or evaluated the development of IPTO in osseointegrated implants, which were placed prior to the commencement of anti-resorptive or anti-angiogenic agents, were included. Twenty-three (23) articles were included in this study. Patient characteristics, aetiopathogenesis, presentation, and treatment of the disease were evaluated. Most studies suggested a 6-month period between dental implant insertion and the commencement of anti-resorptive therapy as a criterion for IPTO. Both infective and mechanical processes were reported to be involved in the pathogenesis of IPTO. Most patients required surgical intervention to achieve resolution. While there are several knowledge gaps regarding IPTO, the evidence points towards a continuum in the pathogenesis of the disease, whereby there is a mechanical cause followed by secondary infection. Similar to typical MRONJ, the severity and treatment required also vary. Persistent peri‑implantitis features around a dental implant should alert the clinician to the possibility of IPTO in patients taking anti-resorptive or anti-angiogenic agents. Prompt identification of the disease may play a role in timely management or appropriate referrals.

Clinical Impact on Dental Implant Survival in Patients Taking Antiresorptive Medications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Dental implants are a predictable option to replace missing teeth. Patients on antiresorptive medications used to treat disorders associated with bone resorption may need dental implants to replace missing teeth. The data on implant failure in patients on antiresorptive medication requiring dental implants, is conflicting and limited. This systematic review aims to investigate if antiresorptive medications have any clinical impact on dental implant survival. Electronic databases were searched until May 2020. The focus question (PICOS): Participants: humans, Interventions: implant placement surgery in patients on antiresorptive medication, Comparisons: patients on antiresorptive medication vs control (patients not on antiresorptive medication), Outcomes: implant survival, and Study design: clinical studies. The protocol of this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020209083). Fourteen nonrandomized studies were selected for data extraction and risk of bias assessment using the ROBINS-1 tool. Only studies with a control were included for the meta-analysis, 8 articles were included in the meta-analysis using implant-level data, and 5 articles were included in the meta-analysis using patient-level data. There was no statistical significance between the 2 groups at the patient level based on 265 patients. However, there was a statistically significant difference at the implant level based on 2697 implants. Therefore, antiresorptive medications, mainly bisphosphonates (BPs), may significantly contribute to implant failure. Antiresorptive medications, especially BPs may reduce implant survival and impair the osseointegration of dental implants. Failed implants in patients on BPs may not lead to osteonecrosis and may be replaced with success.

Is medication related osteonecrosis of the jaw around implants a rare entity? A case series with a focus on etiopathophysiology

OBJECTIVES

Medication Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw (MRONJ) around dental implants is a rare complication of antiresorptive drug (ARD) treatment. MRONJ has been described in patients with implants placed before, during or after ARD treatment. The aim of this study was to review our cases and to discuss a preventive approach to avoid the risk of MRONJ around implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of the 168 MRONJ seen in our department from 2005 to 2021, we searched for cases of patients with MRONJ around dental implants.

RESULTS

Six patients (4 females, 2 males) presented with MRONJ around 17 implants. Median age was 64 (50-83) years. Four patients received ARD treatment for osteoporosis and 2 for cancer. The maxilla was more affected than the mandible. Six implants were placed after the initiation of ARD treatment and eleven were placed before initiation of ARD treatments. Eight implants were managed surgically while 9 implants were managed conservatively.

CONCLUSION

In this series, implants were placed before or after starting ARD treatment. Despite initial successful osseointegration, MRONJ occurred months or years after initiation of ARD treatment. The role of periimplantitis should be discussed as well as the role of microcracks in the bone following implant loading. Less is known over the effect of ARD treatment after implant osseointegration. Implants could be a risk factor for MRONJ and must be checked regularly (every 3 months). It is important to check the healthy and biomechanical harmony of the implant system during the pre-treatment assessment.

Antiresorptive therapy and dental implant survival: an up to 20-year retrospective cohort study in women

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effects of antiresorptive treatment on the survival of plateau-root form dental implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing antiresorptive therapy via oral or intravenous administration as well as patients not undergoing antiresorptive therapy and healthy control patients were included in this retrospective cohort study. In total, 1472 implants placed in 631 postmenopausal patients (M: 66.42 ± 9.10 years old), who were followed for a period of up to 20 years (8.78 ± 5.68 years). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed, and univariate and multivariate Cox regression, clustered by each patient, was used to evaluate and study factors affecting the survival of their implants.

RESULTS

Implants placed in patients undergoing oral antiresorptive treatment presented significantly higher survival rates, than implants placed in the osteoporosis/osteopenia control cohort (p value < 0.001), and similar survival rates, when compared to healthy controls (p value = 0.03). Additionally, clustered univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis also revealed higher implant survival when oral antiresorptive drugs (p value = 0.01 and 0.007, respectively) were used, and lower implant survival in the presence of untreated osteoporosis/osteopenia (p value = 0.002 and 0.005, respectively). Overall, the 20-year implant survival in osteoporotic patients undergoing antiresorptive therapy was 94%. For the failed implants, newly replaced implants in patients under antiresorptive treatment presented a 10-year survival of 89%.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term plateau-root form implant survival in osteoporotic patients taking oral antiresorptives was similar to a healthy population and significantly higher than the untreated controls.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These results suggest that plateau-root form implants provide a robust solution for treating tooth loss in patients, who are undergoing antiresorptive therapy.

Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw Subsequent to Peri-Implantitis: A Case Report and Literature Review

The aim of this report was to document a rare case of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) that developed around the already osseointegrated implants in the maxillary right molar region. A 73-year-old woman presented at our university dental hospital in May 2017 with a chief complaint of discomfort near a maxillary implant. Her first visit was in 2006, and the maintenance treatment began in 2007 after the periodontal treatment. During the implant maintenance period there were no complications; however, the patient began taking alendronate sodium hydrate (Fosamac tablets, 35 mg, once weekly), an oral bisphosphonate (BP) since 2013, for treatment of osteoporosis. Eight years after starting implant maintenance, in 2016, peri-implantitis occurred, for which mechanical cleaning and antimicrobial therapy were performed. Peri-implantitis symptoms disappeared, and the medical condition improved. Nonetheless, in 2017, MRONJ developed 4 years after she commenced taking the BP. The patient underwent implant removal and sequestrectomy. There was no postoperative recurrence. Since it was such a rare case, we performed a literature review but only discovered a few similar cases. Because various triggers may lead to the development of MRONJ, even if already osseointegrated implant, it is important to note that implants in patients taking BPs should be more carefully maintained.

Review and Update of the Risk Factors and Prevention of Antiresorptive-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw

Antiresorptive-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ) is a rare but serious adverse event of bisphosphonate or denosumab administration; it is associated with severe pain and a deteriorated quality of life. Since its first report in 2003, there have been many studies on its definition, epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Nevertheless, the epidemiology and mechanisms underlying this condition have not yet been fully delineated and several risk factors are known. Moreover, as there is no effective treatment currently available for osteonecrosis of the jaw, prevention is essential. Furthermore, close cooperation between prescribing physicians and dentists is important. The aim of this review was to provide up-to-date information regarding the risk factors and prevention of ARONJ from a physician's perspective.

A Review of Literature on Updates of Bisphosphonates Administration, Cancer Biomarkers for Bisphosphonate Therapy, and Bisphosphonate-related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Breast Cancer

Context: The emergence of bone health maintenance in breast cancer patients is known as an indispensable aspect in survival and morbidity improvement; therefore, bisphosphonates play a substantial role in the prevention/delaying of cancer treatment induced bone loss and skeletal-related events (SREs) in these patients, although this drug can cause necrosis of the jaw. In this article, we aimed at summarizing updated evidence on bisphosphonates administration, biomarkers representative of the efficacy of bisphosphonate therapy, and bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) affection in patients involved in breast cancer. Methods: Associated published articles were searched for in EMBASE, MEDLINE, CDSR, PubMed, Google Scholar, and CINAHL, using the following keywords or, in the case of PubMed database, medical subject headings (MeSH): ‘Diphosphonate’, ‘osteonecrosis’, ‘breast cancer’, and ‘biomarker’ in the abstract or title, and was limited by "clinical trials, meta-analysis and randomized controlled trial” published in English language from 2015 to 2020-09-15. Results: Bisphosphonates depicted remarkable advantages in improving SREs, skeletal morbidity rate (SMR), survival rate, and treatment-emergent adverse events in breast cancer patients in almost all aspects of breast cancer therapy, from adjuvant therapy for the early stage breast cancer to bone metastatic breast cancer (BMBC). The identification of breast cancer biomarkers that are capable of reflecting the outcomes of bisphosphonates therapy is a highly advantageous aid in the optimal utilization of these drugs. Breast cancer biomarkers such as MAF, DOCK4, CD73, TLR9, and CAPG/GIPC1 composite illustrated a significant correlation with bisphosphonates administration. Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) stands out as the most hazardous adverse event of the bisphosphonates with a rationally high incidence among breast cancer patients, which requires cautious prescription of bisphosphonates as well as regular dental health counseling for being prevented. Conclusions: Bisphosphonates are great weapons in the arsenal of breast cancer treatment and, therefore, comprehensive studying of their features leads to the optimal and safe administration of them. Unfortunately, as this procedure can cause necrosis of the jaw, dental procedures should be performed in these patients before starting bisphosphonate treatment.

Is implant surgery a risk factor for osteonecrosis of the jaw in older adult patients with osteoporosis? A national cohort propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the association between dental implant therapy and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in osteoporotic patients and the relationship between tooth extraction, dental implantation, and ONJ.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the Customized Health Information Data from the National Health Insurance Corporation in South Korea. The study population included patients older than 70 years with a history of osteoporosis; the cases included patients who had undergone dental implant surgery between July 2014 and July 2016 with specific procedure codes. The case and control cohorts were stratified by tooth extraction because it was the strongest risk factor to consider in this study. Each group of patients was matched using the propensity score. To investigate the relationship between dental implants and ONJ, a Cox proportional hazard model was applied to socio-economic factors, comorbidities, and bisphosphonates (BPs). All analyses were conducted using SAS statistical software.

RESULTS

Based on the fully adjusted model, the propensity score-matched osteoporosis patients with dental implants had a 0.51 times hazard ratio of osteonecrosis. On the contrary, tooth extraction was associated with a higher risk of ONJ (HR = 5.89). The patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and those using BPs had a higher HR, respectively, 6.80 and 4.09 HR (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Dental implantation was not a risk factor and patients with implants show rather lower ratios. However, older osteoporotic Korean patients who had undergone tooth extraction had higher risks of ONJ. A significantly higher risk of ONJ was associated with RA and BPs as well.

Microstructural volumetric analysis of the jaw following dental implantation under systemic bisphosphonate delivery: An in vivo and ex vivo rat study

BACKGROUND

Because of bisphosphonate medication, dental implantation with a subsequent infection poses a relevant risk factor to suffer from medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. This rat study evaluated different implant materials under systemic bisphosphonate delivery using micro-computed tomography (μCT) images.

METHODS

Fifty-four rats were randomly allocated into a control group 1, test group 2 with intravenous drug application of zoledronic acid and test group 3 with a subcutaneous application of alendronic acid. After 4 weeks of drug delivery, the first molar on each side of the upper jaw was extracted, and either a zirconia or a titanium implant was immediately inserted. Radiological examinations at four timepoints before the operation, 1 week later, 6 weeks later and after 12 weeks of follow up included μCT measurements of the in vivo peri-implant bone loss. μCT measurements of the ex vivo peri-implant bony structure after 12 weeks follow-up covered the bone mineral density, -volume, -trabecular thickness and -separation.

RESULTS

Both test groups showed a significant increase in bone loss over time (P < 0.05). The clinical observations of exposed bone revealed that most cases occurred under alendronic acid delivery. Exposed bone was recorded only in the test groups around both titanium and zirconia implants. Regarding the peri-implant bony structure, no significant differences were found between both materials.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic bisphosphonate delivery led to increased peri-implant bone loss over time after immediate implant insertion. In terms of bone resorption and bone quality parameters, no implant material was superior to the other.

Effects of metformin on the prevention of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw-like lesions in rats

PURPOSE

In this study, we aimed to investigate the effect of glucose metabolism on bone healing after tooth extraction in an osteoporosis rat model administered zoledronic acid (ZA) and dexamethasone (DX).

METHODS

In total, 24 male Wistar rats (4 weeks old) were randomly assigned to four groups: Control (subcutaneous physiological saline), ZD (subcutaneous ZA and DX twice a week), Ins+ZD (subcutaneous insulin followed by ZD treatment), and Met+ZD (oral metformin followed by ZD treatment). Blood was collected every two weeks . Two weeks after treatment initiation, the first molar tooth on the right maxilla was extracted from all rats. Four weeks later, the rats were sacrificed, and bone healing was assessed. Maxillae samples were fixed and scanned using micro-computed tomography for quantifying areas of bone defects. Hematoxylin-eosin and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) staining were performed to evaluate bone apoptosis and osteoclast number.

RESULTS

In all experimental groups, body weight was statistically lower than that in the Control group, with no changes observed in uncarboxylated osteocalcin concentrations. The radiological analysis revealed that insulin or metformin administration improved healing in the tooth extraction socket (p < 0.01). Histological examination revealed that the osteonecrosis area was reduced in the Ins+ZD and Met+ZD groups (p < 0.01). TRAP staining presented increased osteoclast numbers in the ZD group when compared with that observed in the Control.

CONCLUSIONS

Tooth extraction with long-term ZA and DX administration inhibited bone remodeling and induced bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw-like lesions. Metformin exerted protective effects ag ainst osteonecrosis of the jaw.

Dental implants as risk factors for patients with medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ)

An increasing number of patients with medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ) has recently been reported. It is still being debated whether the presence or placement of dental implants can lead to MRONJ, so the aim of this study was to find out whether dental implants are a risk factor for MRONJ. From January 2003-January 2019 180 patients with MRONJ were seen at the Leiden University Medical Center. Luxating moments for the onset of MRONJ were calculated retrospectively. We collected clinical data and details of antiresorptive medication and found 22 patients with both dental implants and MRONJ. In 18 patients the implants were in the region of the MRONJ and they were included in this study, 14 who had had implants before using antiresorptive drugs and four who had had antiresorptive drugs before or at the time that the implants were placed. The median times between the placement of implants and the diagnosis of MRONJ in these two groups were 24 months and 6 months, respectively. Among the 47 implants, 30 were located in the necrotic region, and all 30 were either lost spontaneously or had to be removed during treatment of MRONJ. Our results show an increased risk for developing MRONJ in patients with dental implants. Both peri-implantitis around previously placed implants, and insertion of dental implants, are risk factors. Prevention of peri-implantitis and caution when inserting dental implants in patients who take antiresorptive medication are therefore important.

Prevalence and risk factors of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in osteoporotic and breast cancer patients: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) has been reported as a side effect of bisphosphonate (BP). The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence of MRONJ in women taking BP for osteoporosis and for metastatic breast cancer and correlate it with risk factors and biochemical markers of bone metabolism.

METHODS

Patients taking oral or intravenous BP with osteoporosis (G1; n = 153; median 72.8 years) and with metastatic breast cancer (G2; n = 134; median 58.2 years) had their hospital charts reviewed, were submitted to dental inspection, and answered a health questionnaire. Fasting blood samples were randomly collected from both groups to measure osteocalcin, carboxy-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen, intact parathyroid hormone and procollagen type 1 amino-terminal propeptide (P1NP), 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD), creatinine, and total calcium.

RESULTS

G1 was older (p = 0.001) and had more cases of diabetes (p = 0.043). P1NP was higher (p = 0.022) and 25OHD lower (p = 0.004) in G2 compared with G1. MRONJ was not found in the G1, whereas 4 cases (3%) were detected in G2. Positive risk factors for MRONJ were number of BP doses and number of visits to the dentist and dental extractions. The biochemical parameters, however, could not identify those who developed MRONJ.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of MRONJ was 3% in women with metastatic breast cancer receiving BP. No cases were identified in women receiving oral BP chronically for osteoporosis. P1NP was higher in women with metastatic breast cancer, even during treatment with antiresorptives, but could not differentiate those with MRONJ.

Novel insight into the management of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ)

Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ), characterized by refractory bone exposure, has recently emerged as a serious side effect of bisphosphonate (BPs) treatment. We discuss novel insights that may help to improve the efficacy of BRONJ treatment and prevention. Our report highlights the following: (1) The presence of exposed bone in patients taking BPs does not necessarily reflect BRONJ, and diagnoses of oral ulceration with bone sequestration and malignancy must be excluded. (2) Osteonecrosis type of BRONJ is difficult to avoid using preventive dental measures alone. However, as with osteomyelitis type of BRONJ, preventive dental measures are indispensable for reducing the risk of secondary infection and disease progression. (3) The importance of tooth extraction as a risk factor for BRONJ among patients taking BPs has been overstated, particularly when they are administered at low doses. Delaying tooth extraction may increase the risk for the onset and progression of osteomyelitic BRONJ. (4) In patients taking low doses of BPs, dental implant surgery is not necessarily contraindicated if there are no other risk factors, such as combined use of corticosteroids or concomitant diabetes. However, the risk of BRONJ due to peri-implantitis must be explained when obtaining patient consent.

The effect of antiresorptive drugs on implant therapy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

A considerable portion of the adult population has received and/or is receiving treatment with antiresorptive drugs (ARDs). It is thus relevant to assess possible side effects of ARD intake in connection to various aspects of implant therapy. The aim of this study was to answer the focused question "In patients with systemic intake of ARDs, what is the outcome and complication rate of implant therapy including associated bone grafting procedures comparing to patients without systemic intake of ARDs?"

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Original studies fulfilled predefined inclusion criteria (e.g., case series, cohort studies, case-control studies, and controlled and/or randomized controlled clinical trials; retro- or prospective design; and ≥10 patients with systemic intake of ARDs). Various patient-, medication-, and intervention-related parameters [i.e., implant loss, grafting procedure complication/failure, peri-implant marginal bone levels/loss, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ), and peri-implantitis] were extracted, and meta-analyses and quality assessment were performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies with bisphosphonate (BP) intake (mainly low dose for osteoporosis treatment) and seven studies on hormone replacement therapy (HRT), including ≥10 patients, and controls not taking the medication were identified. Furthermore, seven studies on MRONJ associated with implants were included. Meta-analyses based on four studies reporting on patient level and eight studies reporting on implant level showed no significant differences in terms of implant loss between patients on BPs (mainly low dose for osteoporosis treatment) and controls. Furthermore, low-dose BP intake did not compromise peri-implant marginal bone levels. Based on two studies, no negative effect of HRT was observed on the implant level, while HRT appeared to exert a marginally significant negative effect regarding implant survival on the patient level and regarding peri-implant marginal bone levels. Based on six studies reporting single-patient data, MRONJ in patients on BP for osteoporosis appeared in 70% of the cases >36 months after start of drug intake, while in patients with cancer, MRONJ appeared in 64% of the cases ≤36 months after first BP intake.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose oral BP intake for osteoporosis treatment, in general, does not compromise implant therapy, that is, patients on ARDs do not lose more implants nor get more implant-related complications/failures comparing to implant patients without BP intake. There is almost no information available on the possible effect on implant therapy of high-dose BPs or other widely used ARDs (e.g., denosumab), or on the success or safety of bone grafting procedures. Patients with high-dose ARD intake for management of malignancies, patients on oral BP over a longer period of time, and patients with comorbidities should be considered as high-risk patients for MRONJ.

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw associated with implant and regenerative treatments: Systematic review

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine if the treatment with bisphosphonates other anti-resorptive and antiangiogenic agents influences the success of regenerative and / or implant treatments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed the literature from the last 5 years in the PubMed database, using the following words: "Sinus Floor Augmentation"[Mesh] OR "Dental Implants"[Mesh]) OR "Guided Tissue Regeneration"[Mesh]) AND "Osteonecrosis"[Mesh]. The articles were selected following the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were evaluated using the 22 items of the STROBE declaration. The following PICO clinical question was applied: Does the treatment with agents associated with drug osteonecrosis influence the success of regenerative and implant treatments?

RESULTS

The initial search resulted in a total of 27 articles. After eliminating those that did not refer to the topic, were duplicated or did not meet the inclusion / exclusion criteria, a full reading of the articles was made evaluating their methodological quality, obtaining six studies with high methodological quality and two with moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature regarding this topic is scarce, randomized clinical trials would be necessary to establish protocols relative to implant treatment in patients on antiresorptive treatments. The risk of developing an osteonecrosis associated with the regeneration / implant placement in patients with benign bone diseases is scarce, but it exists and it should not be underestimated. Especially, in the posterior areas of the jaw, if the duration of treatment with BP is greater than 3 years, and if the patient is under therapy with systemic corticosteroids.

Denosumab Related Osteonecrosis of Jaw: a Case Report

Background

This case report shows an affected postmenopausal patient with medicaments related osteonecrosis of the jaw injury associated with increased use of bisphosphonates and Prolia^® (denosumab) for the treatment of osteoporosis. The mechanism of action of the receptor activates the denosumab of the nuclear-kB factor binding and makes nuclear-kB Factor, reducing bone volume and reabsorption in the trabecular and cortical bones and, consequently, decreasing an incidence of fractures and maintaining a bone formation. The bone physiology regulated by the hormones calcitonin, parathormone and vitamin D also undergoes interference.

Methods

The injury was located around a dental implant in region #24 and #25 and the patient complained of pain, bleeding, oedema, and halitosis for more than two months, that the dental implant had been installed five years before. According to the clinical findings, the patient presented the exposed and necrotic bone in the region of #24 and #25 and with the radiographs found, it was observed as extensive bone destruction adjacent to the dental implant.

Results

Patient was referred to the maxillofacial surgeon that performed the removal of bone sequestration and dental implant in the region affected. After that, the patient has been accompanied for a year.

Conclusions

Patients taking medications for osteoporosis or cancer need to receive special attention from the dentist. Invasive procedures on the jaw bone of patients taking these medications may cause osteonecrosis of the jaw. When diagnosed, osteonecrosis of the jaw should be treated surgically in conjunction with antibiotic therapy and patients should be monitored.

Treatment with teriparatide for advanced bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw around dental implants: a case report

We report a case of a 66-year-old severely osteoporotic woman with bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) around her dental implants, who was treated successfully with teriparatide and sequestrectomy of the mandible. After 5 months of teriparatide therapy, the sequestrum separation had progressed and a sequestrectomy was performed under general anesthesia. Five months after the operation, new bone formation was observed around the bone defect in the region of the sequestrectomy. A repeat computed tomographic image revealed improvement in the bone defect in the mandible. These results suggest that teriparatide provides beneficial effects in the treatment of advanced BRONJ around dental implants.

Elevation of pro-inflammatory cytokine levels following anti-resorptive drug treatment is required for osteonecrosis development in infectious osteomyelitis

Various conditions, including bacterial infection, can promote osteonecrosis. For example, following invasive dental therapy with anti-bone resorptive agents, some patients develop osteonecrosis in the jaw; however, pathological mechanisms underlying these outcomes remain unknown. Here, we show that administration of anti-resorptive agents such as the bisphosphonate alendronate accelerates osteonecrosis promoted by infectious osteomyelitis. Potent suppression of bone turnover by these types of agents is considered critical for osteonecrosis development; however, using mouse models we found that acceleration of bone turnover by teriparatide injection did not prevent osteonecrosis but rather converted osteoclast progenitors to macrophages expressing inflammatory cytokines, which were required for osteonecrosis development. In fact, we demonstrate that TNFα-, IL-1α/β- or IL-6-deficient mice as well as wild-type mice administered a TNFα-inhibitor were significantly resistant to development of osteonecrosis accompanying infectious myelitis, even under bisphosphonate treatment. Our data provide new insight into mechanisms underlying osteonecrosis and suggest new ways to prevent it.

Antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: Position Paper 2017 of the Japanese Allied Committee on Osteonecrosis of the Jaw

Antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ) is an intractable, though rare, complication in cancer patients with bone metastases and patients with osteoporosis who are treated with antiresorptive agents, including bisphosphonates and denosumab. Despite the more than 10 years that have passed since the first cases of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) were reported, our understanding of the epidemiology and pathophysiology of ARONJ remains limited, and data supported by evidence-based medicine are still sparse. However, the diagnosis and staging of ARONJ, identification of risk factors, and development of preventive and therapeutic approaches have advanced significantly over the past decade. The Position Paper 2017 is an updated version of the Position Paper 2010 of the Japanese Allied Committee on Osteonecrosis of the Jaw, which now comprises six Japanese academic societies. The Position Paper 2017 describes a new diagnostic definition for ARONJ, as proposed by the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS), summarizes our current understanding of the pathophysiology of ARONJ based on a literature search, and suggests methods for physicians and dentists/oral surgeons to manage the disease. In addition, the appropriateness of discontinuing antiresorptive medications (drug holiday) before, during, and after invasive dental treatments is discussed extensively. More importantly, the manuscript also proposes, for the first time, the importance of interactive communication and cooperation between physicians and dentists/oral surgeons for the successful treatment of ARONJ. The Position Paper 2017 is intended to serve as a guide for improving the management of ARONJ patients in Japan.

Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in metastatic breast cancer patients: a review of 25 cases

Background

Intravenous bisphosphonates have been used in metastatic breast cancer patients to reduce pathologic bone fracture and bone pain. However, necrosis of the jaw has been reported in those who received intravenous bisphosphonates. Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) is caused by dental extraction, dental implant surgery, and denture wearing; however, it occurs spontaneously. The purpose of this study was to report BRONJ in metastatic breast cancer patients.

Methods

Consecutive 25 female patients were referred from the Department of Oncology from 2008 to 2014 for jaw bone discomfort. Staging of breast cancer, history of bisphosphonate infusion, etiology of BRONJ, and treatment results were reviewed. Average age of the patients was 55.4 years old (38–74). Twelve maxillae and 16 mandibles were involved. Conservative treatments such as irrigation, antibiotic medication, analgesics, and oral gargle were applied for all patients for the initial treatment. Patients who had sequestrum underwent debridement and primary closure.

Results

The etiologies of BRONJ were dental extraction (19 cases), dental implant (2 cases), and endodontic treatment (1 case). However, three patients did not have any risk factors to cause BRONJ. Three patients died of progression of metastasis during follow-up periods. Surgical debridement was performed in 21 patients with success in 18 patients. Three patients showed recurred bone exposure and infection after operation.

Conclusions

Prevention of the BRONJ is critical in metastatic breast cancer patients. Conservative treatment to reduce pain, discomfort, and infection is recommended for the initial therapy. However, if there is a sequestrum, surgical debridement and primary closure is the key to treat the BRONJ.