Premium
What impact do systemically administrated bisphosphonates have on oral implant therapy? A systematic review
Author(s) -
Madrid Carlos,
Sanz Mariano
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01772.x
Subject(s) - medicine , dentistry , implant , medline , inclusion and exclusion criteria , osteonecrosis of the jaw , systematic review , osseointegration , randomized controlled trial , meta analysis , clinical trial , bisphosphonate , surgery , osteoporosis , alternative medicine , pathology , political science , law
Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate, analysing the dental literature, whether: • Patients on intravenous (IV) or oral bisphosphonates (BPs) can receive oral implant therapy and what could be the risk of developing bisphosphonate‐related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ)? • Osseointegrated implants could be affected by BP therapy. Material and methods: A Medline search was conducted and all publications fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria from 1966 until December 2008 were included in the review. Moreover, the Cochrane Data Base of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE (from 1980 to December 2008) were searched for English‐language articles published between 1966 and 2008. Literature search was completed by a hand research accessing the references cited in all identified publications. Results: The literature search rendered only one prospective and three retrospective studies. The prospective controlled non‐randomized clinical study followed patients with and without BP medication up to 36 months after implant therapy. The patients in the experimental group had been on oral BPs before implant therapy for periods ranging between 1 and 4 years. None of the patients developed BRONJ and implant outcome was not affected by the BP medication. The three selected retrospective studies (two case–controls and one case series) yielded very similar results. All have followed patients on oral BPs after implant therapy, with follow‐up ranging between 2 and 4 years. BRONJ was never reported and implant survival rates ranged between 95% and 100%. The literature search on BRONJ including guidelines and recommendations found 59 papers, from which six were retrieved. Among the guidelines, there is a consensus on contraindicating implants in cancer patients under IV‐BPs and not contraindicating dental implants in patients under oral‐BPs for osteoporosis. Conclusions: From the analysis of the one prospective and the three retrospective series (217 patients), the placement of an implant may be considered a safe procedure in patients taking oral BPs for <5 years with regard to the occurrence of BRONJ since in these studies no BRONJ has been reported. Moreover, the intake of oral‐BPs did not influence short‐term (1–4 years) implant survival rates.