Implant Placement Adjacent to Successfully Treated Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw (BRONJ)

Clinical Performance of Implant-Supported Prostheses in the Rehabilitation of Patients Previously Treated for Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws (MRONJ): A Systematic Review

There is a lack of consensus on managing resultant bone and soft tissue defects or on restoring oral function and aesthetics following medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ) lesion healing. This clinical challenge presents a dilemma for practitioners. Removable prostheses pose a recurrence risk if poorly fitted and may inadequately restore function or aesthetics in cases of significant bone defect. Dental implant-supported prostheses could enhance function and quality of life, though their risks and indications are not well-defined. This systematic review examines the clinical outcomes and complications associated with implant-supported rehabilitations post-MRONJ surgery. This study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations and it was pre-registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42023492539).

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.

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.

Dental Implant Placement in Patients on Bisphosphonate Therapy: a Systematic Review

Objectives

The review aims to study dental implant placement purposefulness for patients who have been treated or are on treatment with bisphosphonate medication.

Material and Methods

Structured search strategy was applied on electronic databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central and ResearchGate. Scientific publications in English between 2006 and 2017 were identified in accordance with inclusion, exclusion criteria. Publication screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed. Outcome measures included implant failure or implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

Results

In total, 32 literature sources were reviewed, and 9 of the most relevant articles that are suitable to the criteria were selected. Heterogeneity between the studies was found and no meta-analysis could be done. Five studies analysed intraoral bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement, three studies investigated intravenous bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement and one study evaluated both types of medication given in relation with implant placement. Patients with intraoral therapy appeared to have a better implant survival (5 implants failed out of 423) rate at 98.8% vs. patients treated intravenously (6 implants failed out of 68) at 91%; the control group compared with intraoral bisphosphonate group appeared with 97% success implant survival rate (27 implants failed out of 842), showing no significant difference in terms of success in implant placement.

Conclusions

Patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates seemed to have a higher chance of developing implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. The intraorally treated patient group appeared to have more successful results. Implant placement in patients treated intraorally could be considered safe with precautions.

Dental implant treatment after healing of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) in the same region: a case report

Although pathophysiology, incidence, and factors associated with the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) and management strategies for patients treated with bisphosphonates or patients with BRONJ are well-established, few guidelines or recommendations are available for patients with a history of successfully healed BRONJ. We present a case of successful dental implant treatment after healing of BRONJ in the same region of the jaw, and speculate that implant placement is possible after healing of BRONJ surgery in select cases.