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

A study of peri-implant tissue clinical parameters in patients starting anti-osteoporosis medication after existing implant function: a prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Recently, rare cases of medication-related peri-implant osteonecrosis of the jaw (PI-MRONJ) have been reported. In patients with functional implants who begin using anti-osteoporosis medications (AOMs) after implantation, PI-MRONJ is unpredictable and poses a significant threat to the patient. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of AOMs on peri-implant tissues and to examine risk factors for peri-implantitis, a presumed trigger for PI-MRONJ.

METHODS

The study cohort consisted of patients who underwent implant maintenance treatment between January 2016 and February 2024. Patients were divided into AOM users (AOM group) and controls (control group). Clinical parameters were statistically evaluated, including implant probing depth (iPPD), implant bleeding on probing (iBoP), marginal bone resorption (MBL), and mandibular cortical index (MCI) measured at baseline and at the last visit. Risk factors were examined by multivariate analysis for adjusted odds ratios.

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients (35 male, 59 female) with 270 implants were recruited. The AOM group had 93 implants (24 patients). Comparison of clinical parameters showed significantly greater changes in iBoP (p = 0.000768) and MBL (p = 0.000863) scores over time in the AOM group than in the control group. Risk factors for peri-implantitis were a history of moderate or severe periodontal disease (OR: 15.8, 95% CI 3.6-69.3, p = 0.000256) and MCI class 3 (OR: 3.3, 95% CI 1.4-7.8, p = 0.00534).

CONCLUSIONS

In implant treatment of AOM users, special attention should be paid to local inflammation, which is presumed to be the cause of PI-MRONJ.

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.

Italian position paper (SIPMO-SICMF) on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ)

OBJECTIVE

This paper aims to describe the 2023 update position paper on MRONJ developed by the Italian Societies of Oral Pathology and Medicine (SIPMO) and of Maxillofacial Surgery (SICMF).

METHODS

This is the second update following the 2013 and 2020 Italian position papers by the Expert panel, which is a representation of the two scientific societies (SIPMO and SICMF). The paper is based on an extensive analysis of the available literature from January 2003 to February 2020, and the subsequent review of literature conducted between March 2020 and December 2022 to include all new relevant published papers to confirm or modify the previous set of recommendations.

RESULTS

This position paper highlights the main issues of MRONJ on risk estimates, disease definition, diagnostic pathway, individual risk assessment, and the fundamental role of imaging in the diagnosis, classification, and management of MRONJ.

CONCLUSION

The Expert Panel confirmed the MRONJ definition, the diagnostic work-up, the clinical-radiological staging system and the prophylactic drug holiday, as recognized by SIPMO-SICMF; while, it presented novel indications regarding the categories at risk of MRONJ, the prevention strategies, and the treatment strategies associated with the therapeutic drug holiday.

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.

Osteonecrosis of the jaws in patients under osteoporosis treatment: a nine-year experience report

None.

Biomechanical analysis of alveolar bones with compromised quality supporting a 4-unit implant bridge; a possible association with implant-related sequestration (IRS)

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the strain in the bone surrounding dental implants supporting a 4-unit bridge and assess the role of excessive strain as a possible risk factor for implant related sequestration (IRS) or peri-implant medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (PI-MRONJ).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 3D-mandibular model was constructed using computed tomography and segmented it into cortical and cancellous bones. The 4-unit implant-supported bridges replacing the mandibular posteriors were constructed, and each featuring two, three, and four implants, respectively. The Young's modulus was assigned based on the quality of the bone. A maximum occlusal force of 200 N was applied to each implant in the axial and in a 30-degree oblique direction.

RESULTS

The maximum principal strain of the fatigue failure range (> 3000 µε) in the bone was analyzed. The volume fraction of fatigue failure was higher in poor-quality bone compared to normal bone and oblique load than in axial load. An increasing number of implants may dissipate excessive strain in poor-quality bones.

CONCLUSIONS

Occlusal force applied to poor-quality bone can result in microdamage. Given that unrepaired microdamage may initiate medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw, long-term occlusal force on fragile bones might be a risk factor.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

When planning implant treatment for patients with compromised bone status, clinical modifications such as strategic placement of implants and optimization of restoration morphology should be considered to reduce excessive strain which might be associated with IRS or PI-MRONJ.

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.

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.

Medication-related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw Induced by Regenerative Therapy in Implant Dentistry: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

There is limited scientific evidence regarding the medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) induced by regenerative therapy (RT) associated with dental implant treatment. Thus, the current scoping review systematically maps the MRONJ research induced by RTs in implant dentistry and recognizes the existing gaps in knowledge.

DATA

Original studies and reviews investigating the impact of RT on the development of MRONJ were included.

SOURCES

Two reviewers independently searched the MEDLINE-PubMed and Scopus databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Review and included articles published in English up to March 31, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Eighteen articles that fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this study. Ten mapping parameters for investigating the association of RTs with MRONJ development were examined and evaluated within the selected articles.

RESULTS

There was severely limited information regarding the procedures of RTs including; the grafting materials, surgical protocols, and success and failure rates. The RT associated with MRONJ cases was sinus floor augmentation in patients taking bisphosphonate and denosumab. Moreover, there were limited data on the implant treatment associated with RTs such as time of insertion, implant length and diameter, and loading protocol.

CONCLUSION

The current scoping review revealed that some specific RTs associated with other factors hold a potential risk of MRONJ occurrence. However, the scientific evidence is limited with many gaps. Further investigations are needed to establish an evidence-based clinical guideline for treating high-risk patients.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Clinicians should cautiously assess the risk of MRONJ development during implant treatment planning for patients undertaking antiresorptive medications. The adverse outcome of RT procedures should not be underestimated and a complete explanation of the possible risks should be given to the patients.

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.

The Role of Apical Periodontitis Disease in the Development of Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: An Animal Study

BACKGROUND

Microorganisms and their by-products are responsible for establishing pulpal and periapical diseases. Healing is compromised in patients under bisphosphonate therapy, and the presence of periapical infections can potentially lead to the development of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). This work aimed to evaluate if bisphosphonate therapy is a risk factor for MRONJ development in the presence of periapical lesions.

METHODS

Two groups of 10 female Wistar rats were used. The experimental group received zoledronate (0.1 mg/kg) intraperitoneally, and the control received a saline solution, three times a week for three weeks. One week after the last injection, apical periodontitis was induced through pulpal exposure in the mandibular first molars. Twenty-one days later, the animals were intravenously injected with ^99mTc-HMDP, and the radioactivity uptake by mandibular specimens was counted. In addition, sample radiographs and a histological examination were performed.

RESULTS

The bone loss was higher in the control group when compared to the experimental group (p = 0.027). ^99mTc-HMDP uptake in the control was reduced compared with the experimental group, although without statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

In the presence of zoledronate therapy, apical periodontitis does not increase the risk of MRONJ development, and periapical lesions have lower bone resorption when compared to the control group.

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.

Effect of systemic antiresorptive medication on the histopathological parameters of implant osseointegration in an in vivo rodent study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the osseointegration of zirconia and titanium implants in the rat maxilla in specimens under systemic antiresorptive therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After 4 weeks of systematic medication administration (either zoledronic acid or alendronic acid), 54 rats received one zirconia and one titanium implants that were immediately inserted in the rat maxilla after tooth extraction. Twelve weeks after implant placement, histopathological samples were evaluated for implant osteointegration parameters.

RESULTS

The bone-implant-contact (BIC) ratio revealed no significant inter-group or inter-material differences. The distance between the implant shoulder to the bone level was significantly greater around the titanium implants of the zoledronic acid group compared to the zirconia implants of the control group (p = 0.0005). On average, signs of new bone formation could be detected in all groups, although often without statistical differences. Signs of bone necrosis were only detected around the zirconia implants of the control group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

At the 3-month follow-up, no implant material was demonstrably better than the others in terms of osseointegration metrics under systemic antiresorptive therapy. Further studies are necessary to determine whether there are differences in the osseointegration behavior of the different materials.

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.

Bevacizumab-associated implant presence-triggered osteonecrosis: A case report and literature review

The effect of bevacizumab-related osteonecrosis of the jaw on previously osseointegrated dental implants has not been adequately studied. Here, we report a case of osteonecrosis of the jaw detected around dental implants placed prior to bevacizumab therapy. A 66-year-old woman undergoing bevacizumab therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, developed malocclusion following buccal gingival swelling and pain in the #18, #19, and #20 tooth region. The patient visited a local dental clinic, where existing implants in relation to #19 and #20 were removed. Subsequently, the patient visited our department, and intraoral examination revealed necrotic bone in the region corresponding to #19 and #20. Radiographic examination showed a pathological fracture in this region that was considered to result from osteonecrosis of the jaw. Bevacizumab therapy was suspended temporarily till the acute inflammation had subsided. In addition, treatment with antibacterial agents and conservative surgery was considered. Complete soft tissue coverage was observed 14 days following surgery. In recent years, the number of patients receiving bevacizumab treatment has increased. Since bevacizumab-related osteonecrosis of the jaw could occur around previously osseointegrated dental implants as well, this case report suggests an effective treatment regimen based on a combination of antibacterial agents and conservative surgery.

Alendronate/dexamethasone combination therapy worsens soft and hard tissue wound healing around implants in rat maxillae

Dental implant treatment in patients prescribed medications is associated with bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) around the implants. However, there is no scientific information on how bisphosphonate and/or steroid therapies affect wound healing around implants after implant placement. The aim of this study was to histopathologically and immunopathologically investigate the effects of bisphosphonate and/or steroid therapy on the early stages of soft and hard tissue wound healing around implants in rat maxillae. Eight-week-old female Wistar rats were used. Alendronate (ALN) monotherapy, dexamethasone (DEX) monotherapy, and ALN/DEX combination therapy were started 4 weeks after tooth extraction of right maxillary first molars. Saline was used as a control (n = 14/group). Implant placement was carried out after grossly and manually confirming no open wounds at 16 weeks post-extraction. Euthanasia was performed at 18 weeks post-extraction. Microcomputed tomography, histological stains and immunostaining to detect blood vessels and macrophages were performed to quantitatively analyze wound healing around implants. ALN/DEX combination therapy significantly increased necrotic bone with more empty lacunae and polymorphonuclear cell infiltration with open wounds when compared with all other therapy groups. Necrotic bone was broadly distributed from the crestal bone to the lower area near the apex of the implants in the ALN/DEX group. Interestingly, both ALN/DEX combination therapy and DEX monotherapy significantly increased the number of CD68⁺NG2^- macrophages, whereas only ALN/DEX combination therapy, not DEX monotherapy, significantly shifted the M1/M2 ratio to M1 by significant increases in M1 macrophages and unchanged M2 macrophages in the connective tissue around implants. Within the limitations of this study, these findings may contribute to understanding the early stages of the histopathology and immunopathology of BRONJ-like lesions around dental implants. Continuous accumulation of M1 macrophages without alteration of M2 macrophages may be associated with developing BRONJ around implants.

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.

Effects of osteoporosis on alveolar bone repair after tooth extraction: A systematic review of preclinical studies

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to address whether the alveolar socket repair after a tooth extraction is impacted by an osteoporotic phenotype and propose methodological observations.

DESIGN

A search strategy in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases was performed. Quality assessment was carried out through the SYRCLE Risk of Bias tool.

RESULTS

Out of the 1147 potentially relevant records, 25 met the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were performed in rats, and ovariectomy (OVX) was the most frequent osteoporosis induction method. Histomorphometry, micro-computed tomography (microCT), and immunohistochemistry were the main bone repair evaluation methods. Most of the included studies (88 %) presented negative impacts of osteoporosis on the alveolar socket repair. Only three studies (12 %) showed no statistical differences among groups. Overall, most of the quality assessment categories presented a high percentage of unclear risk of bias due to insufficient information in the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicated that an osteoporotic phenotype seems to impair alveolar socket repair after tooth extraction. However, there is still a lack of information and standardization. Therefore, further studies should consider the proposed methodological aspects regarding animal characteristics, OVX associated with a low calcium diet, waiting 8 weeks to osteoporosis induction, maxillary molars as the best option for tooth extraction, confirming and reporting OVX and osteoporosis success, and an appropriate method of repair analysis.

Mandibulectomy Reconstruction with Pectoralis Major Island Flap Associated with Primary Reconstruction Plate for Mandibular Medication-Related Osteonecrosis

A bimaxillary edentulous male patient, aged 67 years, diagnosed with prostate cancer who underwent intravenous bisphosphonates treatment (zoledronic acid) for about one year presented with pain in the anterior mandibular arch, with exposed necrotic bone, and was diagnosed with stage 2 medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). MRONJ is the development of bone necrosis in the oral cavity as an adverse reaction in patients treated with antiresorptive and antiangiogenic medication, without radiation therapy to the head and neck. This persistent bone necrosis does not always respond to standard treatments. The reconstruction technique with pectoralis major flap, at a distance, associated with the primary reconstruction plate, was an effective treatment modality for the treatment of large osteonecrosis noncompliant with conservatory treatments. Through this technique, the morpho-functionality of the jaw can be restored almost completely.

Medication-related osteonecrosis and osteoradionecrosis of the jaws: Update and current management

Medication related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ) and osteoradionecrosis of the jaws (ORNJ) are two different diseases of quite similar appearance. MRONJ is mainly due to antiresorptive or antiangiogenic drug therapy and ORNJ to radiotherapy. The present work aimed at presenting and comparing the current knowledge on MRONJ and ORNJ. They both present as an exposure of necrotic bone and differ in some clinical or radiological characteristics, clinical course and mostly in treatment. They share similar risk factors. A tooth extraction is more frequently found as a triggering factor in MRONJ. The frequency of a maxillary localisation seems higher for MRONJ. On computed tomographic images, a periosteal reaction seems characteristic of MRONJ. More frequent pathological fractures seem to occur in ORNJ. It is mandatory, for ORNJ diagnosis, to exclude a residual or recurrent tumour using histological examination. Both MRONJ and ORNJ are challenging to treat and cannot be managed similarly. For both, it would still be worth to optimise awareness within the medical community, patients' oral hygiene and dental cares to improve their prevention and make their incidences decrease. Conservative therapy is more frequently achieved for MRONJ than ORNJ and surgical resection is more often performed for ORNJ. For both diseases, the last treatment possible in refractory cases is a surgical extensive resection with free flap reconstruction. A MRONJ classification is widely used today, whereas no consensus exists to date for ORNJ classification. We propose a classification that could play this role.

Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of Jaws (MRONJ) Prevention and Diagnosis: Italian Consensus Update 2020

The Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of Jaws (MRONJ) diagnosis process and its prevention play a role of great and rising importance, not only on the Quality of Life (QoL) of patients, but also on the decision-making process by the majority of dentists and oral surgeons involved in MRONJ prevention (primary and secondary). The present paper reports the update of the conclusions from the Consensus Conference-held at the Symposium of the Italian Society of Oral Pathology and Medicine (SIPMO) (20 October 2018, Ancona, Italy)-after the newest recommendations (2020) on MRONJ were published by two scientific societies (Italian Societies of Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Pathology and Medicine, SICMF and SIPMO), written on the inputs of the experts of the Italian Allied Committee on ONJ (IAC-ONJ). The conference focused on the topic of MRONJ, and in particular on the common practices at risk of inappropriateness in MRONJ diagnosis and therapy, as well as on MRONJ prevention and the dental management of patients at risk of MRONJ. It is a matter of cancer and osteometabolic patients that are at risk since being exposed to several drugs with antiresorptive (i.e., bisphosphonates and denosumab) or, more recently, antiangiogenic activities. At the same time, the Conference traced for dentists and oral surgeons some easy applicable indications and procedures to reduce MRONJ onset risk and to diagnose it early. Continuous updating on these issues, so important for the patient community, is recommended.