Page 16 - GP fall 2023

Table 1

Articles/Authors Number of studies Medication use Outcome- Author’s conclusions Overall risk
analyzed in the review of bias/Results
Lemos 2023 19 12 studies Oral and No difference in implant survival between Well-constructed systematic
intravenous patients with and without osteoporosis review.
bisphosphonates OR 1.78 95% confidence interval (CI) Overall high risk of bias in the
0.86-3.70 p-value: 0.12. included studies.

Dental implants are a viable treatment The data does not distinguish
option for rehabilitating patients with between oral and intravenous use.
osteoporosis.
Rebelo 2023 20 14 studies Oral and A high mean for failure- rate of implant Well-constructed systematic
intravenous osseointegration (49.96%) was found, review.
bisphosphonates regardless of the type of BPs used. The Overall high risk of bias in the
failure rate was lower in patients using included studies.
second-generation BPs (Alendronate and
Pamidronate). The data does not distinguish
between oral and intravenous use.
Sher, 2021 21 28 studies reporting on Oral and No substantial differences were observed Well-constructed systematic
bisphosphonates (BPs) intravenous between cases/controls, with an implant review.
bisphosphonates. success rate ranging from Overall high risk of bias in the
92.9% to 100% for cases and 95.5% to included studies.
100% for the controls.
The data does not distinguish
Combining the included studies, between oral and intravenous use.
the overall implant failure rate was
2.8% (patients taking bisphosphonates)
for cases and 2.1% for controls (not taking
bisphosphonates).

Implant losses were more likely to occur in
the posterior maxillary region and shortly
after placement.

The follow-up period after
implant placement ranged from
0.3 to 12.2 years.

A risk of MRONJ developing after implant
placement in patients with a history of
bisphosphonates.
Chappuis, 2018 22 Of the 17 studies, 7 Oral and The usage of oral BPs for the treatment Well-constructed systematic
focused on BP use intravenous of osteoporosis did not yield significance review.
and implant failure/ bisphosphonates when analyzing their impact on implant
success. failure or survival. Overall high risk of bias in the
included studies
Oral BP did not show statistical
significance results.
Gelazious 2018 23 9 studies Oral and No significant differences in terms of the Well-constructed review.
intravenous success of implant placement.
bisphosphonates Overall high risk of bias in the
For patients with oral BP therapy, included studies.
97% of dental implant success.
Schmitt 2018 24 18 studies Oral and Implant survival rate ranged from 92.86% Well-constructed systematic
intravenous to 100%. review.
bisphosphonates
Within the limits of this review, implant Overall high risk of bias in the
treatment seems to be a valuable approach. included studies.

Limitations for patients taking BP’s due to
a malignant disease.

www.nysagd.org l Fall 2023 l GP 16