Effect of dental implants on bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws

Clinical and radiologic treatment outcomes of implant presence tirggered-MRONJ: Systematic review of literature

BACKGROUND

The present systematic review evaluated clinical and radiographic features and treatment outcomes of peri-implantitis-induced medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (Pi-MRONJ).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Studies reporting Pi-MRONJ were included. No time restrictions were applied.

RESULTS

In total, 571 articles were retrieved, and 24 articles were included in the final review. Study population consisted of 111 patients (70% pharmacologically treated for osteoporosis and 30% for oncologic disease). Pi-MRONJ was characterized by pain, bone exposure and suppuration, and involved a single implant in 55 cases, two implants in 37 cases, three implants in 10 cases, and more than four implants in nine cases. Most of the lesions were assigned Stage II and III. MRONJ developed on average 46.5 ± 33.2 months following implant placement. Sixty-one lesions were surgically treated with implant removal and debridement of the surrounding necrotic bone. Complete wound healing was observed in 85% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of dental implants in patients treated with antiresorptive drugs should be considered as a potential risk factor for MRONJ onset. In cases of periimplantitis with delayed wound healing following nonsurgical therapy, the clinician should rule out the presence of Pi-MRONJ.

Effect of Antiresorptive Drugs on Osseointegrated Dental Implants: A Systematic Review

Background: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of antiresorptive drug therapy on osseointegrated dental implants and the association with medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). Methods: A systematic search, including a computer search of several databases with specific keywords, a reference search, and a manual search of four key maxillofacial journals were performed. Relevant articles were then evaluated and those that fulfilled the five predetermined criteria were chosen to enter the final review. A total of 445 implants in 135 subjects were included in the eight studies analyzed in the final review. Results: The failure rate of dental implants after antiresorptive medication in the included studies was 23%, with 83% of failures attributed to MRONJ. The average time from antiresorptive drug initiation to MRONJ development was approximately 34 months, ranging from 3 months to 16 years. The majority of MRONJ cases were classified as stage 2, and all sites showed either complete healing or substantial mucosal coverage after treatment. Conclusions: This review highlights the significant impact of antiresorptive drugs on osseo- integrated implants, with MRONJ identified as a leading cause of implant failure. The potential role of peri-implantitis as a trigger for MRONJ is emphasized. Regular monitoring and maintaining good periodontal health, especially within the first three years of antiresorptive drug therapy initiation, are crucial for implant success. Physicians and dentists should provide comprehensive information to patients prescribed with antiresorptive drugs, emphasizing the need for an awareness of the risks of MRONJ in the context of osseointegrated implants. A longer term of follow-up is recommended to identify and manage MRONJ around dental implants in an early manner.

No increased risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw in osteoporotic patients with dental implants: a nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The occurrence of implant-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been reported in osteoporotic patients, particularly in association with bisphosphonate therapy. This study aimed to investigate the risk of implant surgery and implant presence for ONJ occurrence in osteoporotic patients longitudinally.

METHODS

Based on Korean National Health Information Database, subjects over the age of 65 who were diagnosed with osteoporosis between July 2014 and December 2016 were included. The implant group included subjects who had undergone dental implant surgery between January 2017 and December 2017, while the control group included those who had no history of dental implants. The primary outcome was the occurrence of ONJ, and the date of final follow-up was December 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 332,728 subjects with osteoporosis were included in the analysis: 83,182 in the implant group and 249,546 in the control group. The risk of ONJ among those who had undergone implant surgery (risk of implant surgery-associated ONJ) was not higher than that among those without implant surgery. The risk of ONJ among those with implants (risk of implant presence-associated ONJ) was lower than that among those without implants. Even in subjects with a history of bisphosphonates, steroids, periodontitis, or tooth extraction, those who had undergone implant surgery or had implants did not have a higher ONJ risk than those who had not undergone surgery or did not have implants; rather, they showed a lower risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The results may suggest that dental implants are not associated with an increased risk of ONJ. A further study on whether dental implants are associated with lower ONJ risk is needed.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Dental implants did not increase the risk of ONJ development in osteoporotic patients, even with a history of bisphosphonates. This may suggest that the risk profiles for ONJ occurrence between selective insertion of dental implants and other dentoalveolar surgery associated with infectious conditions are different.

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.

Dental implant treatment in patients with cancer on high-dose antiresorptive medication: A prospective feasibility study with 2 years follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Dental implant treatment is considered contraindicated in patients with cancer on high-dose antiresorptive medication (HDAR). The aim of this prospective, feasibility study was to evaluate implant treatment in patients with cancer on HDAR, in terms of implant survival, implant success, and oral health-related quality of life (OHLQoL) after 2 years of loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Implants were inserted in three groups of HDAR patients: (1) Previous tooth extraction, no medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), (2) Previous MRONJ, now healed, (3) Existing MRONJ, planned surgical resection. Implants were placed without adjunctive bone or soft tissue argumentation. Abutment operation was performed after ≥12 weeks. Prosthetic treatment was initiated ≥14 weeks. Survival and success rate were determined, and OHLQoL was analyzed with OHIP-49 and QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires. Patients were seen for 6 months, 1- and 2 years follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients, 39 implants, completed the implant-based prosthetic treatment. Implant-supported crowns and overdentures were fabricated. Thirteen patients (59%) with 23 implants (59%) completed 2 years follow-up. Overall implant survival and success rate after 2 years of loading were 100% and 97.4%, respectively. OHLQoL for the patients increased in all groups after the treatment, a substantial increase was seen in group 3. Two patients developed MRONJ, but not related to the implant treatment.

CONCLUSION

Dental implant treatment, with high survival and success rate and increased post-treatment OHLQoL, is feasible in HDAR patients after 2 years of loading. Caution with general recommendations should be exercised.

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.

Bisphosphonates and Their Connection to Dental Procedures: Exploring Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws

Bisphosphonates are widely used to treat osteoporosis and malignant tumors due to their effectiveness in increasing bone density and inhibiting bone resorption. However, their association with bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (BRONJ) following invasive dental procedures poses a significant challenge. This review explores the functions, mechanisms, and side effects of bisphosphonates, emphasizing their impact on dental procedures. Dental patients receiving bisphosphonate treatment are at higher risk of BRONJ, necessitating dentists' awareness of these risks. Topical bisphosphonate applications enhance dental implant success, by promoting osseointegration and preventing osteoclast apoptosis, and is effective in periodontal treatment. Yet, systemic administration (intravenous or intraoral) significantly increases the risk of BRONJ following dental procedures, particularly in inflamed conditions. Prevention and management of BRONJ involve maintaining oral health, considering alternative treatments, and careful pre-operative and post-operative follow-ups. Future research could focus on finding bisphosphonate alternatives with fewer side effects or developing combinations that reduce BRONJ risk. This review underscores the need for further exploration of bisphosphonates and their implications in dental procedures.

Enhancing the Oral Rehabilitation and Quality of Life of Bisphosphonate-Treated Patients: The Role of Dental Implants

The purpose of this review is to examine the literature on the topic of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) and dental implant failure in patients undergoing bisphosphonate (BP) therapy who also received dental implants before, during, or after BP treatment, as compared to healthy patients. This research followed the guidelines in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The "PICO" or population, intervention, comparison, and outcome clinical question was as follows: does the insertion of dental implants in patients receiving bisphosphonate therapy increase the failure and loss of implants or the incidence of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw compared to healthy patients? The articles published in PubMed/Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) up to July 1, 2023, were retrieved using a mix of Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) words and their entry terms. The absence of randomized clinical trials examining this issue underscores the need for additional studies with extended follow-ups to answer outstanding questions. Because of the potential for BRONJ and implant failure, patients receiving bisphosphonate medication should exercise caution when planning dental implant surgery. In addition, when such procedures are carried out, the patient's entire systemic condition must be considered.

Effect of agents affecting bone homeostasis on short- and long-term implant failure

OBJECTIVES

To review the current evidence on the relationship between agents that affect bone homeostasis and dental implant failures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic searches for bisphosphonates, denosumab, methotrexate, corticosteroids, romosozumab, sunitinib, and bevacizumab were performed using PubMed, MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library), Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (Cochrane Library) and Web of Science (Thomson Reuters). Manual searches were also conducted to complement the digital searches for recent issues.

RESULTS

Previous publications suggested that bisphosphonates do not compromise the survival of dental implants. However, one study documented an increased risk of implant failure in patients who had received high-dose of intravenous bisphosphonate therapy after implant rehabilitation. There has been an issue of MRONJ around implants in patients who have successfully received implant therapy before and after antiresorptive therapy, leading to late implant failure. Despite evidence on the detrimental effects of denosumab, methotrexate and corticosteroids on bone metabolism, their role in implant survival is not conclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, there is insufficient evidence to establish a potential connection between agents that affects bone homeostasis and implant failure. However, some studies have reported negative results for implant therapy. In addition, implant-related sequestration in patients who received anti-resorptive therapy, despite of successful osseointegration, is also noticeable. Although limited studies are available at present, clinicians should still carefully consider the potential hazards and take appropriate precautions to minimize the risks associated with the medications and implant therapy.

Avoiding implant-related complications in medically compromised patients with or without unhealthy lifestyle/Elevated oxidative stress

Increased human life expectancy broadens the alternatives for missing teeth and played a role in the widespread use of dental implants and related augmentation procedures for the aging population. Though, many of these patients may have one or more diseases. These systemic conditions may directly lead to surgical complications, compromise implant/bone healing, or influence long-term peri-implant health and its response to biologic nuisances. Offering patients credible expectations regarding intra- and postoperative complications and therapeutic prognosis is an ethical and legal obligation. Clear identification of potential types of adverse effects, complications, or errors is important for decision-making processes as they may be related to different local, systemic, and technical aspects. Therefore, the present review structures the underlying biological mechanisms, clinical evidence, and clinical recommendations for the most common systemic risk factors for implant-related complications.

Outcome of healing after dental implant placement in patients with cancer on high-dose antiresorptive medications: a prospective feasibility study

PURPOSE

Implant placement in patients with cancer receiving high-dose antiresorptive medication (HDAR) is considered contraindicated. This prospective, feasibility study tested the hypothesis that dental implants can be placed in such patients by applying a staged implant placement protocol with submerged healing.

METHODS

Three groups of patients on HDAR were included as follows: group 1: patients who underwent tooth extraction, without the development of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ); group 2: patients with surgically treated MRONJ who had demonstrated clinical healing for at least 3 months; group 3: patients with established MRONJ who was planned for surgical resection and simultaneous implant placement.

RESULTS

A total of 49 implants were placed in 27 patients (group 1: 12, group 2: 7 and group 3: 8). HDAR included bisphosphonates and denosumab. The mean HDAR time was 25 months (SD: ± 18.4, range 3-68 months). An abutment operation was performed 4 months following the implant placement (SD: ± 1.9, range 3-14 months). All patients healed uneventfully.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that it is feasible to insert dental implants and perform an abutment surgery in patients with cancer on HDAR, without the development of MRONJ.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier: NCT04741906.

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.

American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons' Position Paper on Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws-2022 Update

Strategies for management of patients with, or at risk for, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ) - formerly referred to as bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (BRONJ)-were set forth in the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS) position papers in 2007, 2009 and 2014. The position papers were developed by a committee appointed by the AAOMS Board of Trustees and comprising clinicians with extensive experience in caring for these patients, as well as clinical and basic science researchers. The knowledge base and experience in addressing MRONJ continues to evolve and expand, necessitating modifications and refinements to the previous position papers. Three members of the AAOMS Committee on Oral, Head, and Neck Oncologic and Reconstructive Surgery (COHNORS) and three authors of the 2014 position paper were appointed to serve as a working group to analyze the current literature and revise the guidance as indicated to reflect current knowledge in this field. This update contains revisions to diagnosis and management strategies and highlights the current research status. AAOMS maintains that it is vitally important for this information to be disseminated to other relevant healthcare professionals and organizations.

Host inflammatory response and clinical parameters around implants in a rat model using systemic alendronate and zoledronate acid drug administrations

Implant outcomes in comparison to a natural tooth in a rat model using systemic alendronate and zoledronate acid drug administrations were assessed. Fifty-four Sprague–Dawley rats were randomly allocated into two experimental groups (drug application of zoledronic acid; 0.04 mg/kg intravenously once a week and alendronic acid; 0.2 mg/kg subcutaneously five times a week) and one control group with 18 animals in each group. Drug delivery was conducted for a period of 4 months. After 4 weeks either a zirconia or a titanium implant was immediately inserted in the socket of the first molar of the upper jaw. In vivo investigations included host inflammatory parameters and the implant survival and success rates for up to 3 months. Material incompatibilities against titanium and zirconia nanoparticles were evaluated in vitro after stimulation of rat spleen cells. In vivo, IL-6 release around titanium implants demonstrated significantly higher values in the control group (p = 0.02) when compared to the zoledronic acid group. Around the natural tooth without drug administration, the control group showed higher IL-6 values compared with the alendronic acid group (p = 0.01). In vitro, only lipopolysaccharide and not the implant’s nanoparticles stimulated significant IL-6 and TNFα production. In terms of the primary aim of in vivo and in vitro IL-6 and TNFα measurements, no implant material was superior to the other. No significant in vitro stimulation of rat spleen cells was detected with respect to titanium oxide and zirconium oxide nanoparticles.

In vivo and in vitro analysis in a rat model using zoledronate and alendronate medication: microbiological and scanning electron microscopy findings on peri-implant rat tissue

Background

The aim of the present study was to assess the development of bacterial deposits and morphological parameters around dental zirconia and titanium implants compared with natural teeth during systemic bisphosphonate medication.

Materials and methods

Fifty-four rats were randomly allocated into one control group and two experimental groups (drug application of zoledronic and alendronic acid), with 18 animals in each group. After 4 weeks of drug delivery, either a zirconia or a titanium implant was immediately inserted. Microbiological analysis conducted 1 week, 8 weeks, and 12 weeks after surgery included total bacterial count and composition measurements. Samples were analyzed in a scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). Bone cell morphology was analyzed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM).

Results

One week after surgery, titanium and zirconia implants of the alendronic acid and control group showed a significantly higher bacterial count when compared to natural teeth in rats with zoledronic acid administration (p < 0.01). Less significant differences were recorded after 3 months, at which time no inter-material differences were evaluated (p > 0.05). I n the control group, TEM analysis showed that the osteoblasts had a strongly developed endoplasmic reticulum. In contrast, the endoplasmic reticulum of the osteoblasts in drug-treated animals was significantly less developed, indicating less activity.

Conclusions

Within the limits of this study, neither implant material was superior to the other at 3-month follow-up. With regard to the treatment and complications of patients with bisphosphonates, the implant material should not be an influencing factor. Bisphosphonates can be used in the rat model to reduce not only the activity of osteoclasts but also osteoblasts of the peri-implant bone.

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.

Morphometry and displacement analysis of the upper lips following maxillary full-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses: a 3D morphometric study

BACKGROUND

With the emergence of three-dimensional (3D) integration technology, analysis of soft tissue displacement and morphological changes after maxillary full-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses can be performed. The aim of this study was to verify the feasibility of the 3D integration method for constructing the relative position of the prostheses and facial soft tissue, evaluate the displacement and morphological variation of the upper lips after maxillary full-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses.

METHODS

Twenty-five maxillary edentulous patients were recruited in this study. At the time of final prosthesis delivery, the 3D prostheses data and three 3D facial profiles were integrated. After method validation, the 3D position changes of seven soft tissue landmarks were used to reflect the 25 upper lips. The variation of four morphological distances were analyzed to reflect the morphological alteration of the upper lips. Two pairs of dentofacial landmarks were used to analyze the sagittal relative position of the prostheses and soft tissue. The included patients were also grouped to determine the impact of sex, upper lip thickness, and length on lip support changes.

RESULTS

The average distance of the two matched relative reliable forehead regions was only 0.32 mm. The sagittal shifts of labrale superius (LS), stomion (STO), crista philtri left (CPHL) and crista philtri right (CPHR) were 3.44 ± 1.39 mm, 2.52 ± 1.38 mm, 3.04 ± 1.18 mm, and 3.12 ± 1.21 mm, respectively. With the exception of the decrease in the length of subnasale (SN)-LS, the length of cheilion right (CHR)-cheilion left (CHL), CPHR-CPHL, and LS-STO significantly increased. The two pairs of dentofacial landmarks had strong positive movement correlations along the sagittal direction. Patients with thinner and longer lips showed more lip support than those with thicker and shorter lips by a clinically insignificant amount.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration method of 3D facial and dental data showed high repeatability in constructing the dentofacial relative position. The linear equations reflecting dentofacial relative position could aid clinicians in evaluating the restoration effect and estimate the upper lip variation.

Dental Implant Placement in Patients With a History of Medications Related to Osteonecrosis of the Jaws: A Systematic Review

The present systematic review evaluates the safety of placing dental implants in patients with a history of antiresorptive or antiangiogenic drug therapy. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and OpenGrey databases were used to search for clinical studies (English only) to July 16, 2019. Study quality was assessed regarding randomization, allocation sequence concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting, and other biases using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for case series. A broad search strategy resulted in the identification of 7542 studies. There were 28 studies reporting on bisphosphonates (5 cohort, 6 case control, and 17 case series) and 1 study reporting on denosumab (case series) that met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. The quality assessment revealed an overall moderate quality of evidence among the studies. Results demonstrated that patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment for osteoporosis are not at increased risk of implant failure in terms of osseointegration. However, all patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment, whether taken orally for osteoporosis or intravenously for malignancy, appear to be at risk of "implant surgery-triggered" medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). In contrast, the risk of MRONJ in patients treated with denosumab for osteoporosis was found to be negligible. In conclusion, general and specialist dentists should exercise caution when planning dental implant therapy in patients with a history of bisphosphonate and denosumab drug therapy. Importantly, all patients with a history of bisphosphonates are at risk of MRONJ, necessitating this to be included in the informed consent obtained before implant placement.

Inhibitory Effects of Alendronate on Adhesion and Viability of Preosteoblast Cells on Titanium Discs

Objective  This study aimed to investigate the effects of alendronate (ALN; a bisphosphonate) on adhesion and viability of preosteoblasts using different cell passages on sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) Ti surfaces.

Materials and Methods  Preosteoblast, MC3T3, cells (passage 42; P42 and passage 62; P62) were cultured with ALN (1 and 5 µM) on cell culture plate for 7 days. Cells were lifted, counted, and seeded on SLA Ti surfaces. Cells were incubated on the discs for 6 hours to examine cell adhesion by using confocal microscopy and for 24 hours to determine cell viability by using MTT assay.

Results  ALN interfered with cell adhesion on Ti surfaces by reducing the cell number in both cell passages. Nuclei of untreated cells showed oval shape, whereas some nuclei of ALN-treated cells demonstrated crescent and condensed appearance. ALN at 1 and 5 µM significantly decreased nuclear area and perimeter in P42, while ALN at 5 µM reduced nuclear area and perimeter in P62. After 24 hours, cells (P42) grown on Ti surfaces showed decreased cell viability when culturing with 5 µM ALN.

Conclusion  ALN reduced cell adhesion and viability of preosteoblasts on Ti surfaces. ALN treatment seemed to exert higher inhibitory effects on nuclear shape and size as well as cell viability in lower cell passage. This led to the reduction in cell to implant surface interaction after encountering bisphosphonate treatment.

Proposal for a preventive protocol for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw

Background

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is a severe adverse reaction experienced by some patients exposed to certain drugs (antiresorptives such as bisphosphonates or denosumab, and antiangiogenic drugs). From a review of the literature it appears that there is no uniform criterion when selecting preventive measures; these vary according to author. Likewise, the measures recommended are usually general, so that in few cases they result in specific actions to be applied depending on the different variables involved such as the type of drug used, the duration of its application, the underlying pathology, the presence or absence of risk factors, etc. The aim of this study has been to design a preventive protocol which can be easily applied in any clinic or by any dental care service.

Material and Methods

We undertook an exhaustive literature review to find any articles related to the topic of study, namely, preventive measures for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw, on the one hand generically and on the other focusing on dental implant treatment. The most part the criteria of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. From 3946 items, we selected a total of 21 items.

Results

From the analysis of the selected articles, several protocols have been developed that are easy to apply in a dental clinic.: Protocol 1. Before starting treatment with antiresorptives (Patients who are going to be treated for osteoporosis / Patients who are going to be treated for cancer). Protocol 2. Once treatment is initiated with antiresorptives (Patients being treated for osteoporosis / Patients being treated for cancer).

Conclusions

The application of these protocols requires an interdisciplinary team which can handle the various treatments and apply the measures contained in them. Along with a team of well-educated and trained dentists, it is equally important to maintain contact with the medical team involved in the treatment of the underlying pathology, especially rheumatologists, oncologists, internists and gynaecologists. All the above requires a great staff learning and organization effort, continuous training and coordination of the whole team involved in the preventive management of these patients.

Key words:Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw, clinical protocols, clinical guidelines, prevention.

Success Rate and Safety of Dental Implantology in Patients Treated With Antiresorptive Medication: A Systematic Review

There is no agreement of data on the subject of implant failure and the development of osteonecrosis in patients receiving antiresorptive agents. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate whether dental implants placed in patients on antiresorptive medication have an increased failure rate and whether the implant placement or the implant existence are risk factors for developing medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). An electronic search was conducted in PubMed/Medline, and all publications fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included. The search was completed by a hand research of the references cited in all electronic identified publications, resulting in 411 articles. Based on the inclusion criteria, 32 studies were included, with a total of 5221 patients, 12 751 implants, 618 cases of implants loss, and 136 cases of MRONJ analyzed. Because of the small number of studies, most of which were characterized by a low level of quality, it cannot be established that the use of antiresorptive medication affects dental implant survival rates. The risk of MRONJ as an early or late complication is also not well established. Therefore, successful dental implant procedures in patients receiving antiresorptive medication might be possible, but more studies need to be carried out in the future to verify this topic. Apart from intravenous antiresorptive drugs, which remain an absolute contraindication, the use of antiresorptive medication is not a contraindication to dental implantology, but it must be accompanied by careful treatment planning, informing patients about possible complications, and essential long follow-up periods.

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.

[Validation of the digital integration technology for evaluating the nasolabial morphology variation after the cross-arch fixed restoration of maxillary implant-supported prostheses]

OBJECTIVE

To explore the applicability of integration between three-dimensional (3D) facial and dental data to evaluate the nasolabial morphology variation before and after the cross-arch fixed restoration of the maxillary implant-supported prostheses.

METHODS

Twelve patients (4 women and 8 men), mean age (54.82±5.50) years (from 45 to 62 years) referred to the Department of Oral Implan-tology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, were selected and diagnosed with edentulous maxilla. For all the patients, 4 to 6 implants were inserted into the maxilla. Six months later, the final cross-arch fixed prostheses were delivered. The 3D facial images were collected before and after the final restoration. The 3D data of prostheses were also captured. All the 3D data were registered and measured in the same coordinate system. Then the displacement of all the landmarks [cheilion left (CHL), cheilion right (CHR), crista philtri left (CPHL), crista philtri right (CPHR), labrale supe-rius (LS), subnasale (SN), stomion (STO), upper incisor (UI), upper flange border of the prostheses (F-point, F)], and the variation of the distances between these landmarks (SN-LS, CPHR-CPHL, CHR-CHL, LS-STO) were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

The consistency test among three measurements of the length of F-SN indicated that the integration method of the dental prostheses and soft tissue had the good repetitiveness, ICC=0.983 (95%CI: 0.957-0.995). After wearing the final cross-arch maxillary implant-supported prostheses, all the landmarks on the soft tissue moved forward. The nasal base area changed minimally, and the shift of SN in the sagittal direction was only (0.61±0.44) mm. But the sagittal shift of LS was (3.12±1.38) mm. In the vertical direction, SN, LS, CPHL, and CPHR moved upward. But STO, CHL, and CHR moved downward a little. Except for the slight decrease of the length of philtrum (SN-LS), the length of CHL-CHR, CPHL-CPHR, and the height of upper lip were increased together (P < 0.01). In the direction of Z axis, the strong correlations were found not only between the movements of SN and F (r=0.904 3) but also between the movements of LS and UI (r=0.958 4).

CONCLUSION

The integration method of 3D facial and dental data showed good repetitiveness. And the strong correlations between the landmarks of prostheses and nasolabial soft tissue in the sagittal direction were found by this new method.

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.

Therapeutic approach and management algorithms in medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MONJ): recommendations of a multidisciplinary group of experts

BACKGROUND

The justification for this consensus is the absence of local protocols on Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws (MONJ), for prevention, evaluation, and treatment, involving physicians and dentists, leading to suspension of antiresorptive treatments, despite their benefit in the prevention of fragility fractures (40-70%). These fractures cause disability and mortality (80% and 20-30%, respectively), as opposed to the low risk associated with MONJ in osteoporotic (0.01-0.03%) and oncological patients (1.3-1.8%).

PURPOSE

To provide management recommendations through algorithms that guide health professionals to prevent, diagnose, and treat MONJ in different clinical scenarios.

METHOD

A technical multidisciplinary team composed of specialists with extensive experience in osteoporosis or osteonecrosis of the jaw from Fundación Santa Fé (Bogotá, Colombia) and the Asociación Colombiana de Osteoporosis y Metabolismo Mineral was selected. Three rounds were carried out: definition of questions, answers using Delphi methodology, and the discussion of questions in order to have an agreement. The whole group participated in two phases, and the developer group in the total number of rounds. A literature review was conducted to obtain academic support to design questions with clinical relevance.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The consensus group generated definitions and recommendations useful for doctors and dentists, following clinical algorithms involving four scenarios: osteoporosis patient who requires dental procedures and has not received antiresorptives, osteoporosis patient who are under treatment with antiresorptives, cancer patients, and MONJ-instituted patients. The therapeutic approach in osteoporosis and cancer patients, in invasive dental procedures, must be relied on the risk-benefit treatment.

Incidence and risk of antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ) after tooth extraction in patients with autoimmune disease

INTRODUCTION

Antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ) is a rare but serious complication in patients receiving antiresorprtive agents (AR). However, the incidence of ARONJ after tooth extraction in patients with autoimmune disease (AID) remains unclear. The present study aimed to clarify the high-risk population of ARONJ in patients with AID.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study population comprised 232 patients treated with AR, AID or non-AID, who had undergone dental extraction from January 2011 to September 2017. The incidence and risk factors of ARONJ were analysed retrospectively. Additionally, the relationship between ARONJ and osteoporotic fracture (OF) and AR discontinuation during dental procedures was investigated.

RESULTS

Of 232 patients, 10 developed ARONJ within 1 year of dental extraction. The incidence of ARONJ in patients with AID was higher than that in non-AID patients (2.0/100 person-year vs 0.5/100 person-year; p = 0.03). Among the AID patients, RA patients had strikingly high incidence of ARONJ (3.6/100 person-year). The incidence of neither ARONJ nor OF significantly differed between patients who continued and discontinued AR in the perioperative period.

CONCLUSION

Patients with AID who undergo dental extraction are at high risk of ARONJ. Discontinuation of AR would not significantly contribute to reduce the incidence of ARONJ in those patients.

Enhancement of peri-implant bone formation via parathyroid hormone administration in a rat model at risk for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw

Purpose

Dental implant-associated medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw has been frequently reported in patients administered bisphosphonates (BPs) to prevent osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of intermittent administration of parathyroid hormone (PTH) on peri-implant bone in the maxillae of ovariectomized rats systemically administered BPs.

Methods

Thirty 8-week-old female Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into 3 groups. The OVX-ZP group included ovariectomized rats administered 60 µg/kg of zoledronate once a week for 6 weeks and 30 µg/kg PTH after implant installation. The OVX-Z group included ovariectomized rats administered 60 µg/kg of zoledronate once a week for 6 weeks and saline after implant installation, and the control group included rats that underwent a sham operation and were then administered saline. Rats were sacrificed 4 weeks after implant placement for histomorphometric and micro-computed tomography (CT) analyses.

Results

The average bone area percentage was greater in the OVX-ZP group than in the OVX-Z group (53.4%±4.0% vs. 28.9%±9.5%, P=0.01). The bone-to-implant contact ratio was 50.8%±1.4% in the OVX-ZP group and 16.9%±2.4% in the OVX-Z group (P=0.012). The average bone volume ratio as shown on micro-CT was 31.3%±19.8% in the OVX-ZP group and 19.4%±9.3% in the OVX-Z group (P=0.045). The OVX-ZP and OVX-Z groups displayed similar trabecular thickness (0.06±0.004 mm vs. 0.06±0.002 mm) (P>0.05) and trabecular separation (0.21±0.02 mm vs. 0.29±0.13 mm) (P>0.05). However, the number of trabeculae in the OVX-ZP group was significantly higher than that in the OVX-Z group (4.3±1.33/mm³ vs. 2.2±0.19/mm³) (P=0.024).

Conclusions

The present findings indicate that intermittently-administered PTH can promote peri-implant bone formation and suggest that PTH administration may aid in effective treatment for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw after dental implantation.

Treatment of Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw With Plasma Rich in Growth Factors After Dental Implant Surgery: A Case Report

Oral bisphosphonates are commonly used to improve bone density in patients who suffer from a variety of pathologies. However, they have also been known to cause bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (BRONJ). The aim of this clinical case presentation is to (1) determine whether the currently recommended length of time that oral bisphosphonates should be discontinued, before performing dental implant surgery, is sufficient to prevent BRONJ and (2) to describe an alternative treatment for BRONJ. A 65-year-old female patient developed BRONJ after receiving mandibular dental implants 5 months after discontinuing alendronic acid (Fosamax). The BRONJ was treated by surgical osteotomy and plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF), and the patient was followed up with biweekly examinations, which included 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwashes and removal of any remaining necrotic bone. The dental implants were loaded 41 weeks after surgery and followed up with periapical radiographs and implant stability quotient measurements at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postloading. Although the Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons protocols for suspension of presurgical oral bisphosphonates were followed, this patient still developed BRONJ after implant surgery. While a multitude of treatments have been described in the literature, there is not enough scientific evidence to support any one treatment. Based on this clinical case, it can be concluded that the potential adverse effects of oral bisphosphonates on the jaws could be greater than expected and that treatment with PRGF produces promising results, although more long-term studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Stem-cell therapy for ovariectomy-induced osteoporosis in rats: a comparison of three treatment modalities

Background: Recent studies have shown that ovariectomy-induced osteoporosis in rats can be reversed by infusion of osteoblasts cultured from mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). This study compares the influence of MSCs, osteoblasts, and exosomes derived from osteoblasts for the treatment of osteoporosis.

Methods: Osteoporosis was induced in 40 female Sprague Dawley rats by performing ovariectomy. After 12 weeks, bone marrow was harvested and MSCs separated from bone-marrow aspirate as described by Piao et al. After 15 days, autologous osteogenically differentiated cells from the MSCs were available. Exosomes were isolated from osteoblasts by modification of the technique described by Ge et al. MSCs and osteoblasts (10⁶ cells in 0.5 mL normal saline) and exosomes (100 µg protein) were injected into the tail veins of the animals. Animals were euthanized after 12 weeks and femurs and lumbar spines dissected and analyzed using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography.

Results: When compared to the control group, osteoblast-treated animals showed significant differences in all parameters compared, with P-values ranging between <0.002 and <0.0001. Comparison among osteoblasts, MSCs, and exosomes, showed that osteoblasts had positive and statistically significant new-bone formation. The comparison for the spine was similar to the distal femur for osteoblasts.

Conclusion: This study showed robust positive bone-forming changes after osteoblast injection in the distal femur and the spine when compared to controls, MSCs, and exosomes.

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.

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. Implant presence-triggered osteonecrosis: Case series and literature review

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to review the characteristics of 'implant presence-triggered osteonecrosis' (IPTO) in the literature and identify possible differences between IPTOs and 'implant surgery-triggered osteonecrosis' (ISTO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Reviews using PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were performed from 2009-2018; the focus was on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) and dental implants. In addition, the hospital records of all patients presented in our department with IPTO were retrospectively reviewed. In both studies, the following data were collected: the number of patients with ISTO or IPTO, age, gender, location, stage of MRONJ, number of implants involved in MRONJ, the elapsed time between the placement of the implants and the development of MRONJ, applied treatment and the presence of mandibular fractures and progress.

RESULTS

The literature review provided 111 articles. Nine of the articles were selected for bibliographic review. The number of osteonecrosis cases was significantly higher in the IPTO group (74 cases) compared with the ISTO group (27 cases). The duration of the anti-resorptive treatment (oral and intravenous) was also longer in the IPTO group. In our centre, seven patients with IPTO were chosen; however, no patients with ISTO were selected. The significant differences between the patients in our series and the information collected in the literature for the IPTO group were the time of ingestion of alendronate, the elapsed time from the placement of the implants to the development of the MRONJ and the number of implants linked to the development of a complication.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of antiresorptives causes osteonecrosis in patients with implants that are subjected to functional loading, and this occurs at a higher frequency than what is observed after implant placement surgery.

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.

Development of Antiresorptive Agent-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw After Dental Implant Removal: A Case Report

Dental implant treatment is a highly predictable therapy, but when potentially lethal symptoms or complications occur, dentists must remove the implant fixture. Recently, reports on antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw have increased in the field of dental implants, although the relationship between dental implant treatment and antiresorptive agents remains unclear. Here, we report a case of antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw that developed after dental implant removal. A 67-year-old Japanese woman with a medical history of osteoporosis and 7 years of oral bisphosphonate treatment was referred to our hospital with a chief complaint of painful right mandibular bone exposure. A family dentist removed the dental implants from the right mandible using a trephine drill without flap elevation in August 2016. However, the healing was impaired; she was referred to our hospital 3 months after the procedure. We performed a sequestrectomy of the mandible under general anesthesia. In conclusion, this patient's course has two important implications: First, the removal of dental implants from patients who are prescribed oral bisphosphonates for long durations can cause antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. Second, meticulous procedures are required to prevent and treat the development of antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw after dental implant removal.

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.

Current status of the influence of osteoporosis on periodontology and implant dentistry

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes recent evidence on the impact of osteoporosis on periodontonlogy and implant dentistry, prevalence of diseases, pathophysiology and treatment outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with osteoporosis should be advised about the importance of returning for periodical periodontal maintenance as inadequate oral care may lead to a faster development of periodontitis. There is no definitive information on the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw associated with dental implant therapy. Patients presenting severe periodontitis, undergoing intravenous bisphosphonate therapy (for long-term periods) and submitted to more invasive periodontal/peri-implant surgical procedures (that can promote superior dentoalveolar surgical trauma) might be advised about the possibility of developing bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw following dental therapy. Thus, individualized risk evaluation must be undertaken by both the medical and dental teams prior to any dental treatment.

SUMMARY

The most recent literature on the impact of osteoporosis on the periodontal and peri-implant tissues was reviewed to emphasize the importance of oral hygiene measures, and the combined medical/dental assessment of importance when osteoporotic patients are in need of dentoalveolar surgical procedures (e.g. tooth extraction and dental implant placement).

Bisphosphonate treatment and dental implants: A systematic review

Background

To analyze articles that studied patients submitted to diphosphonates therapy and who received dental implants before, during or after bisphosphonate (BP) treatment, compared to healthy patients, analyzing the increase of failure and loss of implants or bisphosphonate related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) incidence.

Material and Methods

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement was used in this study. The clinical question in “PICO” format was: In patients under bisphosphonate therapy, do dental implants placement, compared to healthy patients, increase the failure and loss of implants or bisphosphonate related osteonecrosis of the jaw incidence? PubMed/MEDLINE was searched for articles published up until April 15, 2015 using a combination of MeSH terms and their Entry terms.

Results

The search resulted in 375 articles. After selection according to the eligibility criteria, 15 studies fulfilled were included (eight retrospective, one prospective and six case series), with a total of 1339 patients analyzed, 3748 implants placed, 152 loss of implants and 78 cases of BRONJ.

Conclusions

Due to the lack of randomized clinical trials looking at this theme, further studies with longer follow-up are needed to elucidate the remaining questions. Thus, it is wise to be careful when planning dental implant surgery in patients undergoing bisphosphonate therapy because of the risk of developing BRONJ as well as occurring failure of implant. Moreover, complete systemic condition of the patient must be also taking into considering when such procedures are performed.

Key words:Bisphosphonates, diphosphonates, dental implants, osteonecrosis.

Dental implants in patients treated with antiresorptive medication - a systematic literature review

Objective

Bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws (BP-ONJ) is triggered by inflammatory processes. Typical trigger factors are periodontal disease, denture pressure sores, and surgical interventions such as tooth extractions. Unfortunately there is only little data on how to proceed with implant therapy in patients with bisphosphonate treatment. This topic is not addressed in the German guidelines on medication-associated osteonecrosis. Therefore a systematic literature review was performed.

Methods

The PICO design was used: (Patients) For which subclientel of patients with antiresorptive therapy (intervention) do dental implants have a benefit (control) compared to forgoing dental implants (outcome) in regards to oral rehabilitation and quality of life without having a substantial risk of BP-ONJ development? A PubMed search was performed including all studies dealing with this topic. Case reports and studies with less than 5 cases were excluded.

Results

There is only very little data available, mostly retrospective case series. 50 articles were analyzed in detail. BP-ONJ can be triggered by dental implants and by dentures in patients with benign and malignant primary diseases. In most studies, analyzing osteoporosis patients only, no cases of BP-ONJ were observed in patients with implant therapy in the time span observed. There are no studies about implant therapy in patients with malignant diseases. Many case series analyzing the trigger factors for BP-ONJ describe dentures as one of the main causes. Perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis has a benefit in the prevention of BP-ONJ development.

Conclusion

Successful implant therapy is possible in patients receiving antiresorptive therapy. The possibility of osteonecrosis development needs to be explained to the patient. An individual risk assessment is essential, taking the primary disease with the medication and further wound-healing-compromising diseases and medications into account. If possible, bone augmentations should be avoided, and a perioperative antimicrobiological prophylaxis is strongly recommended in these patients.

Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw and dental implants

Bisphosphonate (BP) is one of the possible riskfactors in the osteonecrosis of the jaw (ON J). Surgical interventions during or after the course of treatment by using BPs may expose the patient under this risk. Animal studies, human studies, case reports, and systematic reviews are used to show the relationship between the use of bisphosphonates and dental implants. In this review data about bisphosphonaterelated osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRON J): incidence, prevention and treatment modalities for the patients who are scheduled for dental implant treatment plan and who have been already treated by dental implants will be investigated. Various views for the relationship between dental implants and bisphosphonates will be analyzed depending on the multifactors: duration, route of uptake, dosage of the drug and patient's other medications that affect the effects of bisphosphonate. All patients treated with this drug must be informed about the risk of implant loss or possibility of osteonecrosis.

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

It remains unclear whether dental implants are a risk factor for the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ). We retrospectively evaluated the status of dental implants in patients given intravenous bisphosphonates (BPs) in a breast cancer cohort to elucidate the risk for BRONJ at the implant site. We established a BRONJ oral monitoring program for 247 breast cancer patients given intravenous BP in our institution. The 3-year cumulative incidence rate was determined. The systemic and local risk factors of 44 patients who completed comprehensive oral examinations were evaluated by logistic regression analysis. The 3-year cumulative incidence rate of the 247 patients was 0.074 % (8/247, 95 % CI 0.0081-0.014). In the 44 orally examined patients, 6 (13.6 %: 6/44) had dental implants. Of these 6 patients, 1 developed BRONJ at the implant site. There were no significant differences in the age, total BP treatment period, number of residual teeth, time of regular oral monitoring, oral hygiene level, or dental implant insertion. Although a case of ONJ was identified, dental implants which were inserted before intravenous BP administration were not a risk factor for the development of ONJ in breast cancer patients.

High C-Terminal Cross-Linking Telopeptide Levels Are Associated With a Minimal Risk of Osteonecrosis of the Jaws in Patients Taking Oral Bisphosphonates and Having Exodontia

PURPOSE

The clinical significance of bone turnover marker C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide (CTX) levels less than 150 pg/mL among recipients of oral bisphosphonate (OBP) medications who develop osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ) after exodontia is unclear. We searched the published data to determine the prevalence of such levels and the association, if any, with development of MRONJ.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of published studies in the PubMed database was undertaken to ascertain the prevalence of preoperative, fasting CTX levels less than 150 pg/mL among recipients of OBP scheduled for exodontia and to determine whether such levels are associated with the development of postoperative MRONJ. The data were aggregated and analyzed to provide the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the association between low CTX levels and the development of MRONJ.

RESULTS

Two studies were chosen for review. The first, with an enrollment of 21 patients, reported that 10 (48%) patients had a preoperative CTX level less than 150 pg/mL and that after exodontia, none developed MRONJ. The second study, with an enrollment of 950 patients, reported that approximately 282 (30%) had a preoperative CTX level less than 150 pg/mL. All the patients with depressed CTX levels were offered a "drug holiday"; however, only 101 accepted the offer. Of the remaining 181 patients, 4 developed MRONJ. The aggregated study data have demonstrated that 30% of patients evidence CTX levels less than 150 pg/mL and that the sensitivity and specificity of these levels in association with the development of MRONJ was 100% and 80.7%, respectively. The positive predictive value was 2.09% and the negative predictive value was 100%.

CONCLUSION

The published data suggest that approximately one third of patients exposed to OBP will evidence depressed CTX levels and that only a very small minority (∼2%) will develop postexodontia MRONJ. Prudence would suggest that patients scheduled for exodontia and receiving OBPs should be informed about the strengths and weaknesses of the CTX test and that it should be offered during the consent process.