Skip to content

Advertisement

International Journal of Implant Dentistry
International Journal of Implant Dentistry Cover Image
  • Review
  • Open Access

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

  • 1Email author,
  • 1,
  • 2,
  • 1 and
  • 2
International Journal of Implant Dentistry20162:9

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-016-0041-7

©  Walter et al. 2016

  • Received: 26 September 2015
  • Accepted: 23 March 2016
  • Published:

Abstract

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.

Keywords

  • Bisphosphonate associated osteonecrosis of the jaws
  • Bisphosphonate
  • Dental implant
  • Denture
  • Augmentation
  • Sinus lift
  • Antibiotics
  • Quality of life

Introduction

Bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws (BP-ONJ) is a well-known side effect in patients receiving bisphosphonates (BP) due to e.g. osteoporosis, multiple myeloma or malignant diseases with metastases to the bone; prevalences range between 0.1% for patients with primary osteoporosis to 1% in patients with secondary osteoporosis and up to about 20% for special high risk subpopulations of patients with a malignant disease and further predisposing factors [1, 2]. In addition to general risk factors such as the primary disease implicating the antiresorptive therapy, the antiresorptive therapy itself, concomitant diseases and medications and other influencing systemic factors usually a further factor triggering the development of BP-ONJ can be identified such as periodontal disease, extractions, denture pressure sores, or implant insertion [3, 4]. Usually BP-ONJ occurs in patients of higher ages (69 years ±10 years [3]) due to the primary disease causing the BP therapy so that it is not unusual that these patients seek the dentist for oral rehabilitation where implant therapy and bone augmentation for optimal implant positioning might be considered to substitute lost teeth.

There are guidelines describing BP treatment as a contraindication for implant therapy in patients with an oncologic primary disease [5, 6] that say implant insertion should be avoided [7, 8]. On the other hand, there are studies describing the safety of dental implant surgery in patients with oral BP and osteoporosis with no occurring BP-ONJ cases [5]. However, there are cases of successful implant insertion in patients with malignant primary diseases and cases of BP-ONJ in patients with osteoporosis [9, 10]. Reviews mention that there are only very few retrospective studies with moderate strength of evidence addressing this topic [11] so that no final recommendation can be given [12]. Oral and intravenous BP are not seen as absolute contraindications for dental implant therapy and that dental implants can osseointegrate successfully. It is recommended to do a risk assessment and to inform the patient about the potential risk of BP-ONJ development [11–13].

A similar scenario is well known in patients with radiation of the jaws. Initially, radiation therapy was seen as a contraindication for implant insertion [14] because of osteoradionecrosis. In Germany meanwhile, implants are covered by the health insurance by law in some of these patients (§28 SGB V Sozialgesetzbuch). Due to xerostomia sufficient fixation of a denture is rather complicated, and implants can improve the situation and might reduce the incidence of osteoradionecrosis by avoiding pressure denture sores that could result in exposed bone and eventually osteoradionecrosis.

This development could be transferred to patients with antiresorptive treatment (bisphosphonates, denosumab) since implants might reduce the incidence of BP-ONJ due to the lack of denture pressure sores in these patients. As well, denture pressure sores have been described by many authors as the triggering factor for BP-ONJ [15].

The German guidelines on bisphosphonate- and medication-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws state that there might be a limitation in the indication of implant insertion in these patients, but the implant-based oral rehabilitation was not a part of these guidelines [1]. To address this deficit in the literature, the rationale of this literature review was to find out which patients with antiresorptive therapy (BP, denosumab) benefit from dental implants without being exposed to an unreasonable high risk of osteonecrosis development.

Review

Methods

A systematic review was performed in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocols (PRISMA-P),

Focused question

The review was performed using the PICO design.

  • 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.

Search strategy

In June 2015, a PubMed search was performed by TW looking for all available articles; no limitation on the publication date was imposed. The search was modified by CW, BA, ES and KAG so that 24 more articles were identified.

To address the topics, the search terms bisphosphonate and denosumab were used in combination with the following search terms: osteonecrosis, jaw, dental implants, periimplantitis, denture, augmentation, sinus lift, antibiotics, xerostomia, CTX, medication time, masticatory efficiency, tmj disorder, prevention, oral health related quality of life [NOT oral cavity cancer], prognosis dental implant, persisting alveolar socket, sharp bone edges [NOT children NOT osteogenesis imperfecta, ossification [NOT children NOT osteogenesis imperfecta], bone remodeling, and post extraction [NOT children NOT osteogenesis imperfecta]. 17 articles were added due to the manual search (Table 1 and Fig. 1).
Table 1

PubMed literature search with the total number of hits for each topic and the number of included articles for each topic. For each topic the search terms (ST) are given

Topic

Identified (n)

Included (n)

Outcome osteonecrosis risk. ST (bisphosphonate OR denosumab) AND osteonecrosis jaw AND

 Dental implant OR periimplantitis

105

18

 Denture

49

12

 Jaw augmentation OR sinus lift

7

0

 Antibiotics AND dental implant

16

0

 Xerostomia

4

0

 CTX

35

0

 Medication time

16

0

Outcome mastification. ST

 Masticatory efficiency AND dental implant

61

0

 TMJ disorder AND dental implant AND prevention

10

0

Outcome quality of life. ST (bisphosphonate OR denosumab) AND

 Quality of life AND dental implant

5

1

 Oral health related quality of life AND dental implant

1

0

Outcome prognosis remaining dentition. ST (bisphosphonate OR denosumab) AND

 Prognosis remaining dentition AND dental implant

0

0

Outcome prognosis future implants. ST (bisphosphonate OR denosumab) AND

 Dental implant AND prognosis

16

0

 Persisting alveolar socket

2

2

 Sharp bone edges AND jaw NOT children NOT osteogenesis imperfecta

2

0

 Ossification AND jaw NOT children NOT osteogenesis imperfecta

66

0

 Bone remodeling AND post extraction AND jaw NOT children NOT osteogenesis imperfecta

7

 

 Radiologic changes AND jaw NOT children NOT ostegenesis imperfect AND dental implant

1

0

Hand search

 

17

Total

403

50

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Flow diagram of literature search and selection

Study inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria were:

Prospective (randomized controlled, non-randomized controlled, cohort) and retrospective studies (controlled, case control, single cohort) and case series dealing with dental implants in patients with antiresorptive therapy. Studies that had less than five patients or cases were excluded as well as studies whose cases lacked data or were not clearly defined. The studies had to be published in either English or German.

Studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded.

In the first step, the titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility. In the second step, all full-articles were evaluated.

Quality assessment of selected studies

Due to the available data, an explicit quality assessment was not performed.

Data extraction and method of analysis

A table was generated and used to collect the relevant information.

Results

Out of 606 articles 556 articles were excluded because they were either duplicates, case reports, narrative reviews, case series with less than 5 cases or were not associated with the topic at all (Table 1 and Fig. 1). Some of the articles analyzed more than one outcome and are referred to several times. Since the available literature is very inhomogeneous with a low level of evidence a statistical analysis was not performed and the following results are descriptive only.

Dental implants/periimplantitis

The literature dealing with this topic can roughly be separated into three groups:
  1. a.

    BP-ONJ case series exclusively triggered by implants in patients with malignant and benign diseases [9, 10, 16–19],

     
  2. b.

    BP-ONJ case series analyzing case series of BP-ONJ of which varying amounts are caused by implants in part among patients with malignant and benign diseases [20–23] and

     
  3. c.

    implant studies performed exclusively in patients with benign diseases, mostly osteoporosis [24–31]. In very few of these studies, the primary disease was not given, but the prescribed bisphosphonates strongly suggest osteoporosis as the primary disease (see Table 2).

     
Table 2

Included literature

Implant

Author Year Reference

Study type

Patients

Primary disease in BP patients (n)

BP BP-Th (years min- max)

BP-ONJ cases due to implants

Implants (n)

Implant insertion in all patients (patients [n]) Point of time

Comment

before BP therapy

during BP therapy

after BP therapy

 Al-Sabbagh 2015 [24]

RS CS

203 patients with 515 implants; 20 out of those patients with osteoporosis and oral BP

Osteoporosis 20

Oral BP > 3

0

46

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

All patients with implant therapy from 08/2000 until 05/2004 were contacted and data was collected by interview (in person/per telephone). 203 patients with 515 implants; in 20 patients (46 implants) with osteoporosis and oral BP no ONJ occurred no implant was lost. There is no data regarding the implant success in the patients without osteoporosis.

 Nisi 2015 [20]

RS CS

90 patients with established ONJ some of them with implants

Malignoma 90

Z n.s.

9

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

All patients with BP-ONJ from 01/2004 until 12/2015 were retrospectively analyzed. 78% had an additional radiation. It is not clear if the head and neck region was affected and if the implant patients were affected. The study describes the cumulative BP dose, smoking, steroid intake and the maxillary location as risk factors for an increases BP-ONJ stage.

 Holzinger 2014 [9]

RS CS

13 patients with established ONJ due to dental implants

Osteoporosis 5

breast cancer 3

lung cancer 1

Langerhans cell

histiocytosis 1

Z A P I-

0.5 – 9

0 – 15.6

13

47

3

7

3

All patients with BP-ONJ from 04/2004 – 07/2012 were analyzed. Among those were 13 patients (47 implants) with implants as a trigger. 30 implants had to be removed.

It takes longer for BP-ONJ development if implants are placed during or after BP treatment compared to implants being inserted before BP treatment.

 Lopez-Cedrun 2013 [10]

RS CS

9 Patients with established ONJ due to dental implants

Osteoporosis Polymyalgia rheumatica

A I R

0.5 - 10

9

57

-

9

-

Retrospective multicenter study analyzing all patients with BP-ONJ due to dental implants from 01/2009 – 06/2012.

The authors state that the ONJ was more common in the mandible (8/9) and more often in the premolar and molar region.

28 implants maxilla → 1 BP-ONJ

29 implants mandible →8 BP-ONJ

 Tam 2013 [16]

RS CS

6 patients with established BP-ONJ due to dental implants

Osteoporosis 4 breast cancer 1 multiple myeloma 1

A Z

1.5-6

6

 

-

6

-

All patients with BP-ONJ due to dental implants from 2009 – 2011 were analyzed; 3 patients with BP-ONJ in the posterior maxilla 3 patients with BP-ONJ in the mandible (2 distal, 1 anterior)

 Kwon 2014 [17]

RS CS

19 patients with established BP-ONJ due to dental implants

Osteoporosis 18 multiple myeloma 1

A I P R Z 1 - 5

19

n.s.

3

16

-

All patients with BP-ONJ due to dental implants from 06/2008 – 12/2011 were analyzed. 8 patients with BP-ONJ in the maxilla, 9 patients with BP-ONJ in the mandible, 2 patients with BP-ONJ in mandible and maxilla

 Jacobsen 2013 [18]

RS CS

14 patients with established BP-ONJ due to dental implants

Osteoporosis 5

Breast cancer 5

multiple myeloma 2

prostate cancer 1

lung cancer 1

A I P Z

Average BP duration

3.2 osteoporosis; 4.2 malignant disease

14

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

The authors state that implants placed posterior are of higher risk than implants in the anterior region.

4 patients had implants in the posterior maxilla, 5 in the posterior mandible and 3 in the anterior mandible.

In one patient implants were removed and new implants were inserted at the same site with continuing problems.

In one patient a sinus lift was performed

 Famili 2011 [25]

RS CS

211 female patients with 592 dental implants, out of those 120 older than 50 y with 347 implants out of those 22 with BP and 75 implants

Osteoporosis 21 osteoarthritis 1

A I

<1 - > 5

0

75

n.s.

At least 20

n.s.

All female patients with implant therapy from 01/2008 – 06/2010 were analyzed. Among those 22 with oral BP therapy.

One implant did not heal and was successfully replaced

 Kwon 2011 [21]

RS CCS but not focused on dental implants

→ RS CS

Biochemical bone markers were evaluated in 23 osteoporosis patients with established BP-ONJ

Osteoporosis

A

2.5 - 5

2

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

It is not clear, when and how the 23 BP-ONJ patients were recruited. 61 BP control patients.

2 patients developed BP-ONJ due to implants

CTX was evaluated at the time of ONJ diagnosis and not at the time point of any possible BP-ONJ triggering intervention.

 Koka 2010 [22]

RS CS

370 patients over 50 years old with 818 implants. 233 patients could not be reached so that the phone interview was conducted with remaining 137 patients: 55 BP patients and 82 non-BP patients

Osteoporosis

A & n.s.

<3 - > 5

0

121

-

55

-

All patients from 11/2006 – 05/2009 that had not denied access to data for research purposes. None of the BP patients had a drug holiday. 121 implants were inserted, one did not survive.

The patients were not examined only a phone interview was conducted.

The control group consisted of 82 non-BP users with 166 implants (163 survived, 2 losses in 1 patient). 233 patients could not be reached by phone and were excluded.

 Lazarovici 2010 [19]

RS CS

27 patients with established ONJ due to dental implants

Osteoporosis 11

multiple myeloma 7

breast cancer 7

prostate cancer 2

A P Z

average BP duration

A 5.7

Z 1.4

P 4.2

27

n.s.

2

25

-

All patients from 04/2003 – 01/2009 with BP-ONJ and dental implants. 15 patients had implants in the posterior mandible, 5 in the anterior mandible, 4 in the posterior maxilla, 3 in the anterior maxilla

 Goss 2010 [26]

RS CS

Questionnaire to 46 dentists placing either > 50 implants/y or treat BP-ONJ in South Australia

Osteoporosis in the 7 patients with implant loss

A R in the 7 patients with implant loss

7

≥9

4

3

-

46 dentists placed approximately 28,000 implants in 16,000 patients. There is no number given how many patients received BP. 7 implants were lost in patients with BP

 Lo 2009 [27]

RS CS questionnaire

Questionnaire to 13,496 patients with oral BP therapy, 8,572 answered, 2,159 reported dental symptoms, 1005 were examined, 9 BP-ONJ

n.s.

A I R

≥1

1

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

13,946 questionnaires were sent, 5,374 did not participate, 9 ONJ were identified and 1 was associated with an implant loss and a tooth extraction. The bisphosphonates had been administered before implant insertion

 Bell 2008 [28]

RS CS

42 patients with BP therapy and oral bone grafting or implant placement

n.s.

A R I

0

100 or 101 both numbers are given in the paper

-

42

-

All patients from ??/1990 - ??/???? (paper published in 2008) with BP treatment prior to implant therapy were analyzed. 5 implants failed, no patient with more the 1 implant loss, all implants successfully replaced.

30 patients received an additional bone augmentation (socket graft, sinus lift, closed sinus lift, guided tissue regeneration, or tunnel graft).

 Grant 2008 [29]

RS CS

Questionnaire to all 1,319 female patients over 40 y and with implants,

458 patients responded,

115 out of those had oral BP,

72 patients came to a follow-up

n.s.

A I R

Mean 3.2

0

456 in the 115 patients

26

out of the 115

89

out of the 115

-

All 1,319 patients over 40 y of age with implant therapy between 01/1998 – 12/2006 were contacted.

 Fugazotto

2007

[30]

RS CS

61 patients out of two private practices with oral BP

n.s.

A R

Mean 3.3

0

169

-

61

-

All 61 patients with oral bisphosphonates with implant therapy between 01/2005 – 12/2005 were analyzed. 43 immediate implants

1 Pat had exposed bone at a different location that was treated by debridement. At the next control there was granulated soft tissue.

 Jeffcoat 2006 [31]

PS

50 patients with 210 implants

25 patients with oral BP 102 implants

25 patients without BP 108 implants

Osteoporosis 25

A R

1 - 4

0

102

-

102

-

Longitudinal single-blind controlled study

Two-stage osseointegrated implants in all patients,

no BP-ONJ

 Marx 2005 [23]

RS CS

119 patients with BP-ONJ

n.s. for the patients with implants

n.s. for the patients with implants,

in 1 case Z & P

4

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

n.s.

RS with 119 ONJ patients, 4 due to dental implants

Denture

Author Year Reference

Study type

Patients

Primary Disease in BP-ONJ

BP/Denosumab

BP-ONJ Cases

Comment

 Nibbe 2015 [15]

RS

424 patients with oral/IV BP or denosumab.

128 patients with IV BP or denosumab - further investigation of this group

68 patients with dentures

n.s. in all cases

Oral/IV BP

Denosumab

16

424 patients with oral or IV BP were analyzed, 21 BP-ONJ, only IV BP patients for further analysis

34 removable dentures → 11 BP-ONJ

34 fixed partial denture → 5 BP-ONJ

60 patients without denture → 5 BP-ONJ

ONJ only in patients with IV BP or denosumab

 Hasegawa 2012 [43]

RS

Questionnaire was sent to 248 medical institutions regarding BP-ONJ

250 patients

99 with dentures

151 without dentures

n.s.

Oral/IV BP

99

151 osteonecrosis patients without denture had a longer osteonecrosis free time.

Most ONJ in the mandible with a focus on the premolar and molar region

154 patients with IV BP, 102 with oral BP, 7 both

 Jabbour 2012 [35]

RS

14 patients with BP-ONJ

4 due to dentures

Osteoporosis 2

kidney cancer 1

breast cancer 1

A P

4

RS analyzing the reason for osteonecroses

 Vahtsevanos 2009 [39]

RS

1,621 patients with IV BP

n.s.

n.s. for the denture patients

24

24 out of 80 BP-ONJ patients denture as triggering factor diseases and BP for the patients with dentures n.s. I P Z were used as BP in the BP-ONJ patients.

 Kos 2010 [36]

RS

34 patients with BP-ONJ

n.s.

n.s. for denture patients

3

34 patients with osteonecrosis. A I P R Z were used as BP it is not clear what the patients with the dentures received and which primary disease was present.

BP-therapy for all patients 0.3 – 8 y

 Carmagnola 2008 [34]

RS

39 oncologic patients with BP

Multiple myeloma 2

breast cancer 3

prostate cancer 1

kidney cancer 1

P Z

7

7 out of 20 BP-ONJ patients had an osteonecrosis due to denture pressure sores

BP given for 1.1 – 6.8 y

 Walter 2008 [40]

CSS

43 patients with prostate cancer out of those 21 patients with denture out of those 6 with ONJ

Prostate cancer

Z

1

1 denture induced ONJ

 Kyrigidis 2008 [38]

CCS

20 breast cancer patients 40 matched controls

Breast Cancer

Z

8

20 patients with breast cancer and osteonecrosis, 8 with dentures use of dentures associated with BP-ONJ

 Kumar 2008 [37]

RS CS

13 patients with BP-ONJ

Osteoporosis 4

breast cancer 1

multiple myeloma 1

A Z

6

6 out of 13 patients denture as the trigger factor

 Yarom 2007 [42]

RS CS

11 patients with BP-ONJ

Osteoporosis

A

2

2 out of 11 BP-ONJ triggered by denture Alendorante was given for 2 and 6 y

2 patients (1 osteoporosis, 1 rheumtoid arthritis) had an implant related BP-ONJ in the posterior mandible, BP was given for 5 and 7 years

 Walter 2007 [41]

RS CS

163 patients with an osteonecrosis, 17 BP-ONJ

Multiple Myeloma

P

1

1 BP-ONJ due to a denture pressure sore in the mandible

P was given for 5 y

 Bamias 2005 [33]

PS

252 patients with BP

17 with BP-ONJ

Multiple Myeloma

n.s.

2

2 BP-ONJ due to a denture pressure sore

I P Z for all 252 patients

Quality of life

Author Year Reference

Patients

Comment

 DeBaz 2015 [44]

524 patients asked to fill out the survey

237 completed survey

3 groups:

64 dental implant supported prosthesis

47 non-implant supported fixed restoration

60 non-implant supported removable restoration

66 no restoration of missing teeth

The quality of life assessment:

occupational score

health score

emotional score

sexual score

The patients dental implant supported prosthesis had the overall best score regarding quality of life compard to the other groups

In total 134 patients reported oral BP, 51 IV BP, 10 patients denosumab

In the implant group 35 patients received oral BP, 12 IV BP, 3 denosumab

no ONJ

Persisting alveolar socket

Author Year Reference

Study type

Patients

Comment

 Hutchinson 2010 [46]

CSS

10 patients with stage 0 BP-ONJ

Consistent findings of regional or diffuse osteosclerosis, density confluence of cortical and cancellous bone, prominence of the inferior alveolar nerve canal, thickened sclerotic lamina dura, periradicular radiolucencies, cortical disruption, and persisting alveolar sockets.

 Grötz 2006 [45]

RS CS

42 patients with BP-ONJ

Consistent findings of persisting alveolar sockets.

Hand search

Author Year Reference

Study type

Patients

Comment

 Grötz 2012 [1]

Guideline

German guidelines on bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws (BP-ONJ) and other medication-related necroses of the jaw

 Grötz [52]

 

Description on many important aspects on implant surgery in bisphosphonate patients or patients with other resorptive medications.

 Grötz 2013 [53]

Review

The authors state the necessity for an individual risk assessment. The evaluation of dentures vs. implants. It is suggested to not place immediate implants in patients with antiresorptive therapy, atraumatic surgery with perioperative antibiotics, the necessity of a recall and the avoidance of bone augmentations

 Grötz 2010 [54]

Review

The authors provide an algorithm how to proceed with patients receiving BP seeking implant therapy.

The authors state the necessity for an individual risk assessment and avoidance of bone augmentations

 Krimmel 2014 [55]

RS

50 patients with BP-ONJ

DMFT of all patients 20.5 ± 4.2

disease free interval for patients with DMFT < 20: 39.7 ± 1.1 months

disease free interval for patients with DMFT > 20: 14.4 ± 2.8 months

The DMFT had no influence on the overall healing rate of BP-ONJ

 Tsao 2013 [56]

CCS

63 patients

22 BP-ONJ patients

41 matched controls

Caries similar between groups

Periodontal disease associated with BP-ONJ (pocket depth, IgG serum titer against Porphyromonas gingivalis, IL 1ß level in gingival cervical fluid)

 Thumbigere-Math 2013 [57]

CCS

73 patients

25 BP-ONJ patients

48 matched controls

BP infusions BP-ONJ 38.4 and control 18.8

BP-ONJ vs control:

missing teeth: 7.8 vs 3.1

clinical attachment level: 2.18 vs 1.56

radiogic bone loss at teeth > 50%: 20% vs. 6%

 Martin 2010 [58]

CSS

8,752 patients with oral BP returned dental survey (62% response rate)

589 patients with dental implants

16 patients with 26 implant failures

8 patients with failure of 12 implants in the maxilla

9 had failure with 14 implants in the mandible

 Shabestari 2009 [59]

RS

21 female osteoporotic women with oral BP and 46 implants

No BP-ONJ, no signs of peri-implantitis

 Zahid 2011 [60]

RS

362 patients with implants

26 BP patients with 51 implants

3 implants failed

Patients with BP had more thread exposure

 Memon 2012 [61]

RS

200 patients

BP: 100 women with 153 implants

control: 100 women with 132 implants

Success equal for both groups 93.5 (BP) vs. 95.5 (control)

crestal bone change from implant insertion to stage two surgery: no difference between the groups

 Yip 2012 [62]

CCS

337 patients

114 patients with implant failure

223 patients without implant failure

% of patients using BP

Implant failure group: 9.65%

no implant failure: 4.04

 Walter 2014 [3]

RS

504 patients with osteonecrosis

227 with BP-ONJ

7 out of 227 patients with BP-ONJ implant as trigger factor

 Lopez-Jornet 2011 [63]

Animal study

120 rats with pamidronate treatment and molar extraction

60 with penicillin

60 without penicillin

Osteonecrosis rate

Penicillin group: 18 → 34.6 %

no penicillin group: 5 → 9.61%

 Montefusco 2008 [51]

RS

178 patients with multiple myeloma und BP treatment

75 patients with dental procedures

32 with antibiotics

43 without antibiotics

ONJ rate

with antibiotics: 0

without antibiotics: 8

Antibiotic prophylaxis can reduce the incidence of BP-ONJ

 Kyrgidis 2012 [50]

PS

Group 1: BP-ONJ breast cancer 21

Group 2: breast cancer 21

Group 3: oral cancer 22

Quality of life assessment before surgery

Group 1 is affected in many factors such as pain, swallowing, senses, social eating, social contacts

 Boquete-Catro 2015 [32]

Review

Analysis of patients with denosumab associated ONJ

No implant related ONJ reported

A: Alendronate; CCS: Case control study, CS: Case series; CSS: Cross sectional study; D: Denosumab; I: Ibandronate; LSBCD: Longitudinal single-blind controlled study; n.s.: Not specified; P: Pamidronate; PS: Prospective Study; R: Risedronate; RS: Retrospective study, Z: Zoledronate

In the BP-ONJ case series (a) and (b), the distribution of BP-ONJ patients between malignant and benign diseases is more or less even, e.g. Holzinger describes 13 patients: 5 osteoporosis, 3 breast cancer, 3 multiple myeloma, 1 lung cancer and 1 Langerhans cell histiocytosis patient [9]. Lopez-Cedrun exclusively found patients with benign diseases: 8 osteoporosis and 1 polymyalgia rheumatic. Jacobsen found 14 patients: 5 osteoporosis, 5 breast cancer, 2 multiple myeloma, 1 prostate and 1 lung cancer patient.

However, implant studies (c) were exclusively performed in patients with benign diseases. Nearly all of these studies do not report a single BP-ONJ triggered by the implant insertion.

A systematic review analyzing the sparse literature on clinical denosumab trials mentioning osteonecroses did not describe dental implants as a trigger [32].

There is no literature describing periimplantitis in these patients.

Denture

The literature dealing with this topic can be separated into two groups:
  1. a.

    BP-ONJ case series for which varying amounts are caused by dentures in patients with malignant and benign diseases [2, 33–42] and

     
  2. b.

    studies performed on BP patients with dentures analyzing the frequency of BP-ONJ [15, 43].

     

Here as well, no imbalance regarding the dignity of the primary disease could be found. Jabbour describes 2 osteoporosis, 1 kidney and 1 breast cancer patient [35]. Kumar found 4 osteoporosis patients, 1 breast cancer patient and 1 patient with multiple myeloma.

Nibbe [15] analyzed 128 patients with IV BP or denosumab separated into 3 groups. In the first group 5 out of 60 patients with no denture had an osteonecrosis (8%), in the 2nd group 5 out of 34 patients with a fixed partial denture had an osteonecrosis 15%, and in the 3rd group 11 out of 34 patients with a removable denture had an osteonecrosis (32%). Kyrgidis determined that dentures increase the risk of BP-ONJ development [38].

Augmentation/sinus lift/antibiotics/xerostomia/CTX

There was no literature available meeting the inclusion criteria. There is evidence in the literature that sinus lifts can be successful [28] and might contribute to BP-ONJ development [18].

Outcome masticatory efficiency/TMJ disorder

There was no literature available meeting the inclusion criteria.

Outcome quality of life (QoL)

There is nearly no literature available on the change of the quality of life due to implants in patients with antiresorptive therapy. One article could be identified [44] that analyzed the quality of life in partially edentulous osteoporosis patients that were restored with (1) a dental implant-supported prosthesis, (2) a non-implant-supported fixed restoration, (3) a non-implant-supported removable restauration, and (4) no restoration that showed a statistically significant difference regarding the improvement of the QoL in patients with a dental implant-supported prosthesis compared to the other sub-groups. Out of the 237 patients, 134 patients had an oral BP and 51 patients an IV BP therapy [44].

Outcome remaining dentition

No articles could be found regarding the prognosis of the remaining dentition depending on implant therapy, neither for patients with bisphosphonate nor denosumab treatment.

Outcome future implants

There are no reliable parameters indicating the success of implants in patients with anti-resorptive therapy. The risk of osteonecrosis development has already been described in the chapter referring to the osteonecrosis risk. Two articles mentioned the radiologic finding of a persisting alveolar socket as a marker indicating the osteonecrosis risk [45, 46]. In addition, other radiologic changes in patients with bisphosphonates have been described, such as regional or diffuse osteosclerosis, confluence of cortical and cancellous bone, prominence of the canal of the inferior alveolar nerve, a prominent lamina dura, radiolucences around the apex and cortical disruptions [46]. Their existence reflects the changes in the bone remodeling due to the anti-resorptive therapy and might be associated with a higher osteonecrosis risk, but there is no evidence supporting this theory.

Discussion

Even latest guidelines and statements dealing with medication associated osteonecrosis of the jaws such as the American [7, 8], Scottish [47], Swiss [6] or German [1] do not address implant therapy in these patients in detail. Due to this lack of data a systematic literature review was performed to fill this gap. Unfortunately the literature dealing with this topic is very sparse and consists mainly of case reports, case series, and a few retrospective studies. Regarding the topics augmentation, masticatory efficiency, TMJ and the impact on the remaining dentition no literature met the inclusion criteria or no literature was available at all.

Surgical procedures such as implant insertion and potential complications such as periimplantitis are associated with an inflammatory condition and can potentially trigger a BP-ONJ. The risk of developing BP-ONJ is higher the more potent the BP are and the longer they were administered [1]. There is lots of literature supporting dental implant therapy in patients with antiresorptive medication in benign primary diseases, with only a few patients developing BP-ONJ (Table. 2). In contrast, the literature regarding successful implant therapy in malignoma patients is very sparse. The majority of publications on malignoma patients describes scenarios with BP-ONJ development (Table 2).

In many cases a denture would be the alternative treatment option to dental implants but many BP-ONJ cases in patients with benign and malignant diseases are caused by denture pressure sores (Table 2), so when deciding whether a patient is eligible for implant therapy, this fact should be considered as well. The consideration needs to take into account how much the patient might benefit from the implant itself, the risk of causing an osteonecrosis due to the procedure and the likelihood of preventing an osteonecrosis by avoiding dentures and denture pressure sores.

In the consideration of a potential implant insertion the need for a bone augmentation or a sinus lift needs to be considered as well. Although there are only very few cases in the literature with augmentation of bone/sinus lift [18, 28], these procedures are linked to a functioning vascular recipient site with working osteoclastic resorption and osteoblastic bone formation, and this is compromised in patients with antiresorptive therapy. Due to the denudation of the bone at the recipient site the vascular situation might be even more compromised, possibly resulting in more BP-ONJ cases so that any kind of augmentation should be considered with extreme care.

Dental implants can improve the Qol in patients with antiresorptive therapy (bisphosphonate/denosumab) [44] analogous to patients without antiresorptive therapy [48]. A recently performed systematic review on masticatory performance, bite force, nutritional state and patient’s satisfaction showed that implant-supported dentures were associated with high patient satisfaction regarding denture comfort and bite force. But interestingly these outcomes were not always related with an increase in general QoL [49]. There is no reason, why this should be any different in patients with antiresorptive therapy in the event of implant success. On the other hand the occurrence of BP-ONJ has a huge impact on the QoL of affected patients since the patients report higher negative affection by pain, problems swallowing and social eating even compared to patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma [50]. Therefore prevention of BP-ONJ should be one of the primary aims.

The risk of triggering a BP-ONJ by implant therapy in patients with benign diseases seems to be rather small. The risk in patients with malignant diseases is hard to describe since mostly negative examples are published but not the total number of patients receiving implant therapy. The distribution clearly illustrates the necessity for an individual risk assessment as it is recommended by most guidelines and the importance of explaining the possibility of BP-ONJ development to the patient. The individual risk is influenced by the primary disease and its treatment, such as the antiresorptive medication (substance, duration of application, frequency of application), concomitant therapy, further diseases (e.g. diabetes), further treatments (e.g. head and neck radiation), further factors (e.g. smoking) and existence of former osteonecrosis/present osteonecrosis. Next to this, the patients need to be compliant with an appropriate motivation for oral hygiene and the necessary skills to transfer this. Infectious foci should be treated before implant therapy to further reduce the risk of osteonecrosis development. The surgical sites should be followed up clinically (persisting sharp bone edges without any tendency to remodel) and radiologically (e.g. persisting alveolar sockets) to identify a compromised wound healing that might be associated with a higher BP-ONJ risk.

The use of bone markers is discussed controversially in the literature, and no clear recommendation can be given at the moment [1, 8]. In these cases, where an implant is planned, a perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis should be administered, similar to the prophylaxis suggested in other surgical procedures performed in these patients, since this seems to be a tool to decrease BP-ONJ frequency [1, 51]. There is no literature on patients with antiresorptive medications other than bisphosphonates, and so the recommendation is to proceed with these patients similarly to patients on bisphosphonates.

Unfortunately literature with high evidence is rare. Dental implants are possible in patients with antiresorptive therapy but an individual risk assessment should be performed and alternative treatment options should be considered keeping the scenario of BP-ONJ development in mind. Implant survival and success rate alone are not sufficient to evaluate the implant supported rehabilitations in patients with bisphosphonates. Even more important is the risk of triggering an osteonecrosis in relation to the possible gain of QoL by an implant supported therapy.

Conclusions

Successful implant therapy is feasible in patients receiving antiresorptive therapy. The risk 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.

Abbreviations

BP: 

bisphosphonate

BP-ONJ: 

bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws

CTX: 

C-terminal telopeptide of the type I collagen

PICO: 

patients intervention control outcome

PRISMA-P: 

preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocols

QoL: 

quality of life

ST: 

search term

TMJ: 

temporomandibular joint

Declarations

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery – Plastic Surgery of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131 Mainz, Germany
(2)
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of the Dr. Horst Schmidt Clinic, Ludwig-Erhard-Str. 100, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany

References

  1. Grötz KA, Piesold JU, Al-Nawas B. Bisphosphonat-assoziierte Kiefernekrose (BP-ONJ) und andere Medikamenten-assoziierte Kiefernekrosen. 2012. AWMF online.Google Scholar
  2. Walter C, Al-Nawas B, Frickhofen N, Gamm H, Beck J, Reinsch L, et al. Prevalence of bisphosphonate associated osteonecrosis of the jaws in multiple myeloma patients. Head Face Med. 2010;6:11. doi:10.1186/1746-160X-6-11.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Walter C, Sagheb K, Bitzer J, Rahimi-Nedjat R, Taylor KJ. Analysis of reasons for osteonecrosis of the jaws. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(9):2221–6. doi:10.1007/s00784-014-1205-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Walter C, Laux C, Sagheb K. Radiologic bone loss in patients with bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws: a case-control study. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(2):385–90. doi:10.1007/s00784-013-0974-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Madrid C, Sanz M. What impact do systemically administrated bisphosphonates have on oral implant therapy? A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20 Suppl 4:87–95. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01772.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Borm JM, Moser S, Locher M, Damerau G, Stadlinger B, Gratz KW, et al. Risk assessment in patients undergoing osseous antiresorptive therapy in dentistry. An update. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed. 2013;123(11):985–1001. 955.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Advisory Task Force on Bisphosphonate-Related Ostenonecrosis of the Jaws AAoO, Maxillofacial S. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons position paper on bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(3):369–76. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2006.11.003.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Ruggiero SL, Dodson TB, Fantasia J, Goodday R, Aghaloo T, Mehrotra B, et al. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons position paper on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw--2014 update. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;72(10):1938–56. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2014.04.031.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Holzinger D, Seemann R, Matoni N, Ewers R, Millesi W, Wutzl A. Effect of dental implants on bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;72(10):1937. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2014.04.037. e1-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Lopez-Cedrun JL, Sanroman JF, Garcia A, Penarrocha M, Feijoo JF, Limeres J, et al. Oral bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws in dental implant patients: a case series. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51(8):874–9. doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2013.06.011.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Chadha GK, Ahmadieh A, Kumar S, Sedghizadeh PP. Osseointegration of dental implants and osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients treated with bisphosphonate therapy: a systematic review. J Oral Implantol. 2013;39(4):510–20. doi:10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00234.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Javed F, Almas K. Osseointegration of dental implants in patients undergoing bisphosphonate treatment: a literature review. J Periodontol. 2010;81(4):479–84. doi:10.1902/jop.2009.090587.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Bedogni A, Bettini G, Totola A, Saia G, Nocini PF. Oral bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw after implant surgery: a case report and literature review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(7):1662–6. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2010.02.037.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B, Kammerer PW, Grotz KA. Oral rehabilitation with dental implants in irradiated patients: a meta-analysis on implant survival. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(3):687–98. doi:10.1007/s00784-013-1134-9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Niibe K, Ouchi T, Iwasaki R, Nakagawa T, Horie N. Osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with dental prostheses being treated with bisphosphonates or denosumab. J Prosthodont Res. 2015;59(1):3–5. doi:10.1016/j.jpor.2014.08.001.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Tam Y, Kar K, Nowzari H, Cha HS, Ahn KM. Osteonecrosis of the jaw after implant surgery in patients treated with bisphosphonates--a presentation of six consecutive cases. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014;16(5):751–61. doi:10.1111/cid.12048.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kwon TG, Lee CO, Park JW, Choi SY, Rijal G, Shin HI. Osteonecrosis associated with dental implants in patients undergoing bisphosphonate treatment. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(5):632–40. doi:10.1111/clr.12088.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Jacobsen C, Metzler P, Rossle M, Obwegeser J, Zemann W, Gratz KW. Osteopathology induced by bisphosphonates and dental implants: clinical observations. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(1):167–75. doi:10.1007/s00784-012-0708-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Lazarovici TS, Yahalom R, Taicher S, Schwartz-Arad D, Peleg O, Yarom N. Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw associated with dental implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(4):790–6. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.017.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Nisi M, La Ferla F, Karapetsa D, Gennai S, Miccoli M, Baggiani A, et al. Risk factors influencing BRONJ staging in patients receiving intravenous bisphosphonates: a multivariate analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44(5):586–91. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2015.01.014.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kwon YD, Ohe JY, Kim DY, Chung DJ, Park YD. Retrospective study of two biochemical markers for the risk assessment of oral bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: can they be utilized as risk markers? Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(1):100–5. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01965.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Koka S, Babu NM, Norell A. Survival of dental implants in post-menopausal bisphosphonate users. J Prosthodont Res. 2010;54(3):108–11. doi:10.1016/j.jpor.2010.04.002.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Marx RE, Sawatari Y, Fortin M, Broumand V. Bisphosphonate-induced exposed bone (osteonecrosis/osteopetrosis) of the jaws: risk factors, recognition, prevention, and treatment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;63(11):1567–75. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2005.07.010.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Al-Sabbagh M, Robinson FG, Romanos G, Thomas MV. Osteoporosis and bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis in a dental school implant patient population. Implant Dent. 2015;24(3):328–32. doi:10.1097/ID.0000000000000234.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Famili P, Quigley S, Mosher T. Survival of dental implants among post-menopausal female dental school patients taking oral bisphosphonates: a retrospective study. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2011;32(6):E106–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Goss A, Bartold M, Sambrook P, Hawker P. The nature and frequency of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws in dental implant patients: a South Australian case series. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(2):337–43. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.037.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lo JC, O'Ryan FS, Gordon NP, Yang J, Hui RL, Martin D, et al. Prevalence of osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with oral bisphosphonate exposure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(2):243–53. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2009.03.050.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Bell BM, Bell RE. Oral bisphosphonates and dental implants: a retrospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66(5):1022–4. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2007.12.040.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Grant BT, Amenedo C, Freeman K, Kraut RA. Outcomes of placing dental implants in patients taking oral bisphosphonates: a review of 115 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66(2):223–30. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2007.09.019.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Fugazzotto PA, Lightfoot WS, Jaffin R, Kumar A. Implant placement with or without simultaneous tooth extraction in patients taking oral bisphosphonates: postoperative healing, early follow-up, and the incidence of complications in two private practices. J Periodontol. 2007;78(9):1664–9. doi:10.1902/jop.2007.060514.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Jeffcoat MK. Safety of oral bisphosphonates: controlled studies on alveolar bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;21(3):349–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Boquete-Castro A, Gomez-Moreno G, Calvo-Guirado JL, Aguilar-Salvatierra A, Delgado-Ruiz RA. Denosumab and osteonecrosis of the jaw. A systematic analysis of events reported in clinical trials. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015. doi:10.1111/clr.12556.Google Scholar
  33. Bamias A, Kastritis E, Bamia C, Moulopoulos LA, Melakopoulos I, Bozas G, et al. Osteonecrosis of the jaw in cancer after treatment with bisphosphonates: incidence and risk factors. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(34):8580–7. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.02.8670.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Carmagnola D, Celestino S, Abati S. Dental and periodontal history of oncologic patients on parenteral bisphosphonates with or without osteonecrosis of the jaws: a pilot study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;106(6):e10–5. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.07.011.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Jabbour Z, El-Hakim M, Mesbah-Ardakani P, Henderson JE, Albuquerque Jr R. The outcomes of conservative and surgical treatment of stage 2 bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: a case series. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41(11):1404–9. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2012.05.012.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Kos M, Kuebler JF, Luczak K, Engelke W. Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: a review of 34 cases and evaluation of risk. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2010;38(4):255–9. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2009.06.005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Kumar SK, Meru M, Sedghizadeh PP. Osteonecrosis of the jaws secondary to bisphosphonate therapy: a case series. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008;9(1):63–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Kyrgidis A, Vahtsevanos K, Koloutsos G, Andreadis C, Boukovinas I, Teleioudis Z, et al. Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: a case-control study of risk factors in breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(28):4634–8. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.16.2768.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Vahtsevanos K, Kyrgidis A, Verrou E, Katodritou E, Triaridis S, Andreadis CG, et al. Longitudinal cohort study of risk factors in cancer patients of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(32):5356–62. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.21.9584.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Walter C, Al-Nawas B, Grotz KA, Thomas C, Thuroff JW, Zinser V, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw in prostate cancer patients with advanced disease treated with zoledronate. Eur Urol. 2008;54(5):1066–72. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2008.06.070.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Walter C, Grotz KA, Kunkel M, Al-Nawas B. Prevalence of bisphosphonate associated osteonecrosis of the jaw within the field of osteonecrosis. Support Care Cancer. 2007;15(2):197–202. doi:10.1007/s00520-006-0120-z.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Yarom N, Yahalom R, Shoshani Y, Hamed W, Regev E, Elad S. Osteonecrosis of the jaw induced by orally administered bisphosphonates: incidence, clinical features, predisposing factors and treatment outcome. Osteoporos Int. 2007;18(10):1363–70. doi:10.1007/s00198-007-0384-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Hasegawa Y, Kawabe M, Kimura H, Kurita K, Fukuta J, Urade M. Influence of dentures in the initial occurrence site on the prognosis of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: a retrospective study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;114(3):318–24. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2012.04.002.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. DeBaz C, Hahn J, Lang L, Palomo L. Dental Implant Supported Restorations Improve Quality of Life in Osteoporotic Women. Int J Dent. 2015;2015:451923. doi:10.1155/2015/451923.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Grötz KA, Al-Nawas B. Persisting alveolar sockets-a radiologic symptom of BP-ONJ? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;64(10):1571–2. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2006.05.041.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  46. Hutchinson M, O'Ryan F, Chavez V, Lathon PV, Sanchez G, Hatcher DC, et al. Radiographic findings in bisphosphonate-treated patients with stage 0 disease in the absence of bone exposure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(9):2232–40. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2010.05.003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Wray D, Barlow D, Crighton A, Devennie H, Foster E, Kennedy D et al. Oral Health Management of Patients Prescribed Bisphosphonates Dental Clinical Guidance. Dundee: 2011Google Scholar
  48. Awad MA, Rashid F, Feine JS. Overdenture Effectiveness Study Team C. The effect of mandibular 2-implant overdentures on oral health-related quality of life: an international multicentre study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(1):46–51. doi:10.1111/clr.12205.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Boven GC, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, Meijer HJ. Improving masticatory performance, bite force, nutritional state and patient's satisfaction with implant overdentures: a systematic review of the literature. J Oral Rehabil. 2015;42(3):220–33. doi:10.1111/joor.12241.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Kyrgidis A, Triaridis S, Kontos K, Patrikidou A, Andreadis C, Constantinidis J, et al. Quality of life in breast cancer patients with bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws and patients with head and neck cancer: a comparative study using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-HN35 questionnaires. Anticancer Res. 2012;32(8):3527–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Montefusco V, Gay F, Spina F, Miceli R, Maniezzo M, Teresa Ambrosini M, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedures may reduce the incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with multiple myeloma treated with bisphosphonates. Leuk Lymphoma. 2008;49(11):2156–62. doi:10.1080/10428190802483778.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Grötz KA, Al-Nawas B. Laufzettel Risiko-Evaluation bei antiresorptiver Therapie vor Implantation (Bisphosphonat-, Denosumab-Medikation). DGINETGoogle Scholar
  53. Grötz KA, Al-Nawas B, Terheyden H. Implantate und Bisphosphonat-Therapie. Implantologie. 2013;21(1):53–9.Google Scholar
  54. Grötz KA, Schmidt BLJ, Walter C, Al-Nawas B. Bei welchen Bisphosphonat-Patienten darf ich eigentlich implantieren? Ein systematisches Review. Z Zahnärztl Impl. 2010;26(2):153–61.Google Scholar
  55. Krimmel M, Ripperger J, Hairass M, Hoefert S, Kluba S, Reinert S. Does dental and oral health influence the development and course of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (BRONJ)? Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;18(2):213–8. doi:10.1007/s10006-013-0408-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Tsao C, Darby I, Ebeling PR, Walsh K, O'Brien-Simpson N, Reynolds E, et al. Oral health risk factors for bisphosphonate-associated jaw osteonecrosis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71(8):1360–6. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2013.02.016.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Thumbigere-Math V, Michalowicz BS, Hodges JS, Tsai ML, Swenson KK, Rockwell L, et al. Periodontal disease as a risk factor for bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. J Periodontol. 2014;85(2):226–33. doi:10.1902/jop.2013.130017.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Martin DC, O'Ryan FS, Indresano AT, Bogdanos P, Wang B, Hui RL, et al. Characteristics of implant failures in patients with a history of oral bisphosphonate therapy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(3):508–14. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.055.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Shabestari GO, Shayesteh YS, Khojasteh A, Alikhasi M, Moslemi N, Aminian A, et al. Implant placement in patients with oral bisphosphonate therapy: a case series. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010;12(3):175–80. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00150.x.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Zahid TM, Wang BY, Cohen RE. Influence of bisphosphonates on alveolar bone loss around osseointegrated implants. J Oral Implantol. 2011;37(3):335–46. doi:10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00114.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Memon S, Weltman RL, Katancik JA. Oral bisphosphonates: early endosseous dental implant success and crestal bone changes. A retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27(5):1216–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Yip JK, Borrell LN, Cho SC, Francisco H, Tarnow DP. Association between oral bisphosphonate use and dental implant failure among middle-aged women. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39(4):408–14. doi:10.1111/j.1600-051X.2012.01854.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Lopez-Jornet P, Camacho-Alonso F, Martinez-Canovas A, Molina-Minano F, Gomez-Garcia F, Vicente-Ortega V. Perioperative antibiotic regimen in rats treated with pamidronate plus dexamethasone and subjected to dental extraction: a study of the changes in the jaws. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(10):2488–93. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2011.02.059.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Walter et al. 2016

Advertisement