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

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.

Diagnostic accuracy comparing OPT and CBCT in the detection of non-vital bone changes before tooth extractions in patients with antiresorptive intake

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic accuracy in detecting early non-vital bone changes between orthopantomography (OPT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in correlation with histopathological findings before tooth extractions in patients with antiresorptive (AR) intake.

SUBJECTS

Patients with an indication tooth extraction who had received OPT and CBCT preoperatively while or after undergoing AR treatment were prospectively enrolled over a 24-month period in the progesterone in spontaneous miscarriage (PRISM) trial. Imaging studies were randomly analyzed by three examiners for early non-vital bone changes using specific predefined characteristics and a 5-level scale (1 definite absence of criteria to 5 definite presence of criteria). Sensitivity and specificity values were calculated in correlation with the histopathologically evaluated bone samples at the time point of tooth extraction.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty patients with 237 treated extraction sites met the inclusion criteria. For all images evaluated by all examiners, CBCT (430/492; 87.4%; receiver operating characteristic [ROC]: area under the curve [AUC] = 0.88; p < 0.001) was more likely to detect histopathologically confirmed non-vital bone than the OPT (132/492; 26.8%; ROC: AUC = 0.562; p = 0.115).

CONCLUSIONS

In the detection of non-vital bone changes, CBCT is superior to OPT in both sensitivity and specificity. Specific imaging characteristics allow for the prediction of early non-vital bone changes already at the time before tooth extractions.

Assessment of clinical guidelines for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: current status and future directions

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the current quality and utility of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) issued for the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ).

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a systematic literature search of guidelines for MRONJ diagnosis, staging, prevention, or management. An appraisal of guidelines was completed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Scaled domain scores were calculated for each domain. Key recommendations were abstracted from guidelines distinguished as "high" quality.

RESULTS

Six CPGs were identified from systematic review. Four of 6 (66.7%) guidelines were published within the last 2 years. Each guideline discussed management of antiresorptive and antiangiogenic therapy-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw. The highest-scoring domain was domain 1: "Scope and purpose," with an average score of 85.0% (range: 76.4%-100.0%). The lowest domain score was in domain 5: "Applicability," with an average score of 41.7% (range: 22.9%-92.7%). Only 2 guidelines (33.3%) met the quality threshold of > 60% in 5 or more AGREE II domains, distinguishing them as "high"-quality guidelines. The average kappa statistic calculated across domains was 0.77, suggesting substantial interrater correlation in the CPG appraisal process.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the increasing recognition of MRONJ as a debilitating consequence of antiresorptive and antiangiogenic therapy, clinical guideline recommendations may be lacking in overall quality and clinical utility.

Levels of whole salivary advanced glycation end products and interleukin-17 and peri-implant clinical and radiographic status in patients with osteoporosis at 6-years' follow-up

BACKGROUND

There are no studies that have assessed advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and interleukin 17A (IL-17A) levels in whole saliva (WS) of patients with dental implants. The aim was to compare levels of AGEs and IL-17A in WS and peri-implant clinical and radiographic status of patients with and without osteoporosis at 6-years' follow-up.

METHODS

Osteoporotic (Group-1) and systemically healthy controls (Group-2) having undergone dental implant therapy at least 5 years ago were included. A questionnaire was used to collect information about age, gender, duration and treatment of osteoporosis, number and duration of implants in function, and frequencies of toothbrushing, flossing and hygiene visits. Modified bleeding and plaque indies (mBI and mPI), peri-implant probing depth (PD) and crestal bone loss (CBL) were recorded. WS was collected and levels of AGEs and IL-17A were determined using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay. Sample-size estimation was done and statistical analyses were doing using the independent t- and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Statistical significance was marked for P-values that were below 0.01.

RESULTS

In patients with (n = 24) and without (n = 27) osteoporosis, implants were in function for 6.3 ± 0.27 and 6.6 ± 0.5 years, respectively. There was no significant difference in peri-implant mBI, PD, mPI and CBL in both groups. Levels of AGE in patients with (119.6 ± 26.5 μg/ml) and without (91.5 ± 14.6 μg/ml) osteoporosis were comparable. Levels of whole salivary IL-17A in patients without and with osteoporosis were 4.6 ± 0.3 and 5.1 ± 0.8 pg/ml, respectively. Flossing of full mouth interproximal spaces once and twice daily toothbrushing daily was reported by 100% patients with osteoporosis. Among patients with osteoporosis 75% and 25% individuals were receiving professional dental prophylaxis every 4 and 6 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of the present study osteoporotic patients are not at an increased risk of peri-implant diseases and can demonstrate salivary AGE and IL-17A levels comparable to non-osteoporotic individuals as long as oral hygiene is stringently maintained.

Contribution of Antiangiogenic Agents to the Risk of Medication-related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Combination with Antiresorptive Agents: Preliminary Results in a Comparative Prospective Report of 59 Oncologic Cases

AIM

The aim of this preliminary study was to evaluate in an oncological population the association risk of antiangiogenic (AA) agents to antiresorptive (AR) agents on the incidence and the severity of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective study, we reviewed the medical records and clinical variables of 59 consecutive oncologic patients who developed MRONJ. For all patients, we retrieved the following variables: age, gender, alcohol and tobacco use, type of cancer, use of corticosteroids for >3 months, history of diabetes, MRONJ staging, combination of AR and AA agents, dental history (surgery, prosthesis) or spontaneous, site of MRONJ, delay between AR and AA first intake, and MRONJ development. Patients were divided into two groups according to drugs therapy they underwent: group 1 (G1) including patients treated with AR agents alone and group 2 (G2) including patients receiving antiresorptive-antiangiogenic drugs (AR+AA). The degree and the therapeutical success were defined as primary outcomes and the number, the localization, and the delay in onset of the lesions as secondary outcomes. In order to identify predictive factors of osteonecrosis-free interval time, univariate and multivariate Cox regression was performed. Statistical tests were carried out using the IBM^® SPSS^® Statistics software. All reported P-values are two-tailed and were considered to be significant when less than 0.05.

RESULTS

Among the 47 patients who received AR agent alone (group 1), the mean treatment duration before diagnosis of MRONJ was 39.2 months. In the second group (n = 12), patients developed MRONJ with a comparable mean time of 55 months (P = 0.16). According to the staging of MRONJ at the time of diagnosis, no significant difference (P = 0.736) was observed between the two groups. Moreover, the treatment applied was not statistically different in both the groups and was successful in 36.17% of the patients in group 1 and 58.33% of the patients in group 2. No statistically difference was reported in both the groups (P = 0.16). After statistical analysis, no significant difference in terms of MRONJ localization (P = 0.13) was observed. Finally, the incidence of spontaneous MRONJ was comparable in both the groups. Statistical analysis revealed that total time of treatment was the only factor associated with poor osteonecrosis-free interval time (hazard ratio 0.99; P = 0.001). Interestingly, the combination of an AA and AR agent was not a significant predictor factor of the interval time before the diagnosis of osteonecrosis. Additionally, corticosteroid use, diabetes mellitus, and dental consultation before treatment were not statistically related to poorer osteonecrosis-free interval time rates.

CONCLUSION

In our preliminary study, neither the mean treatment time duration before the diagnosis of MRONJ nor the dose delivered was different in both the groups (AR vs. AR+AA). Moreover, no significant difference was observed between both the groups regarding the localization and the staging of MRONJ at the time of diagnosis. Interestingly, our results demonstrated that the risk of spontaneous MRONJ is statistically comparable in the AR and AR-AA groups. Additionally, the addition of an AA agent did not influence the treatment applied in the two groups of patients.

Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A Critical Narrative Review

Background: Nearly two decades have passed since a paradoxical reaction in the orofacial region to some bone modifying agents and other drugs was recognized, namely medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). Purpose: The aim of this manuscript was to critically review published data on MRONJ to provide an update on key terminology, concepts, and current trends in terms of prevention and diagnosis. In addition, our objective was to examine and evaluate the therapeutic options available for MRONJ. Methods: The authors perused the most relevant literature relating to MRONJ through a search in textbooks and published articles included in several databases for the years 2003–2021. Results and conclusions: A comprehensive update of the current understanding of these matters was elaborated, addressing these topics and identifying relevant gaps of knowledge. This review describes our updated view of the previous thematic blocks, highlights our current clinical directions, and emphasizes controversial aspects and barriers that may lead to extending the accumulating body of evidence related to this severe treatment sequela.

Clinical considerations for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: a comprehensive literature review

Background

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), which was first reported as bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) in bisphosphonate users, is a rare but severe soft and hard tissue disease induced by several types of medications. There has been a deluge of information about MRONJ, such as epidemiology, risk factors, clinical recommendations for dental treatment to prevent it, and treatment strategies in medication-prescribed users. The aim of this study was to comprehensively review recent articles and provide the current scientific information about MRONJ, especially clinical considerations or recommendations for dental treatment to prevent its occurrence.

Materials and methods

The current literature review was mainly based on 14 systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis, 4 position papers, 1 consensus statement, 1 clinical guideline, and 2 clinical reviews regarding MRONJ after a PubMed database and manual searches according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Moreover, 53 articles were selected by manual search in regard to all references from selected articles and other articles identified on the PubMed search, irrespective of publication date, and inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Results

The incidence and prevalence of MRONJ are relatively low, although they are clearly higher in cancer patients receiving high-dose antiresorptive agents or angiogenesis inhibitors rather than osteoporosis patients receiving oral bisphosphonates or denosumab. There are many types of local, systemic, and other risk factors for the development of MRONJ. Clinical recommendations are provided for each clinical situation of patients to prevent MRONJ. There are also treatment strategies for MRONJ in each stage.

Conclusions

General dentists should perform appropriate dental treatment to prevent MRONJ in the patients prior to or when receiving medications that could induce MRONJ. Moreover, there are treatment strategies for MRONJ in each stage that oral surgeons could follow. Adequate and updated clinical information regarding MRONJ based on scientific data is required whenever possible.