1. Introduction
The main current treatment alternative for partial/complete edentulism is implant-supported prostheses (ISP) [
1]. Low bone volume is still a major issue challenging the option of implant dentistry in a substantial number of individuals [
2,
3]. In cases with compromised bone volume, the success rates are lower [
4]. In such circumstances, guided bone regeneration, (GBR) using barrier membranes, is often used to increase bone volume [
5,
6,
7]. Various studies suggested the application of stem cells both for therapeutic and preventive purposes in order to lower the percentage of failed osseointegrated implants. Stem cells also enhance GBR [
8,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13,
14,
15]. Still, even after the introduction of these methods, between 3 and 10% of implants fail (Moy et al., 2005, Alsaadi et al., 2007) [
16,
17]. Systemic factors, such as osteoporosis, may lead to early implant failures (EIF up to 12 months post-loading) [
17].
Osteoporosis is a disease affecting the bone causing fragility fractures. The worldwide prevalence of osteoporosis is high affecting 21.2% of women older than 50 years and 6.3% of men [
18,
19]. Risk factors include postmenopausal state in women, age, smoking, drugs (mainly glucocorticoids) and a variety of systemic diseases.
Treatment of osteoporosis is long term and may last a lifetime. Treatment aims to reduce the risk of fragility fractures. Various treatment alternatives exist, including fall risk reduction and supplementary vitamin D and calcium, but the main and effective treatment are drugs developed for osteoporosisis. Antiresorptive drugs affect the osteoclast cells in various mechanisms leading to fracture rate reduction are among the most popular osteoporosis treatments. Two main classes are used: bisphosphonates—analogues of pyrophosphate characterized by a P-C-P bond and denosumab—antibody against receptor activator of nuclear factor ligand. Besides osteoporosis, these drugs are also used in other bone diseases, such as Paget and malignant lesion of the bone [
20,
21,
22,
23].
Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) related to osteoporotic treatment has been reported in post-marketing observation of bisphosphonates [
5] and in the clinical trials of RANK ligand antagonists and also romosozumab. There have been no reports on osteonecrosis of the jaw related to treatments with SERM or teriparatide.
These drugs are among the bone modulating therapies (BMT) encountering the risk of osteonecrosis of the jaws (ONJ). An ONJ diagnosis consists of (1) exposed necrotic bone; (2) history > 8 weeks; and (3) no history of radiation therapy or metastatic disease to the jaw [
18,
19].
The aim of the present study was to assess the incidence of EIF and ONJ in osteoporotic vs. non-osteoporotic patients undergoing implant-supported oral rehabilitation. The secondary aim was to assess differences between osteoporotic patients using vs. not using BMT.
4. Discussion
In the present study, the rate of EIF in three different groups were assessed: (1) non osteoporotic patients, (2) osteoporotic patients with BMT and (3) osteoporotic patients with no treatment. No statistically significant differences were found between the three groups. Bone augmentation was the only significant risk factor for EIF regardless of the study population.
EIF in osteoporotic patients is a contentious issue. Several contradicting studies exist. Alsaadi et al. [
17] claimed that EIF in osteoporotic patients is higher than non-osteoporotic ones. Kasai et al. [
25], emphasizing the impact of oral bisphosphonates on implant failure, found a survival rate of 86% vs. 95% in bisphosphonate users [
25]. Yap et al., found that EIF odds for osteoporotic women with BMT is 2.69 (95% confidence interval, 1.49–4.86) [
26].
Other studies are consistent with the present reported results. Jeffcoat et al., found no increase in the EIF odds ratio in osteoporotic patients with BMT [
27]. Madrid and Sanz et al., in their systemic review found that dental implant placement in osteoporotic patients with BMT is safe and has no impact on dental implant survival in the short-term [
28].
In the present study, no case of ONJ was reported up to one year post-implant-supported prosthesis delivery, demonstrating the safety of placing implants in osteoporotic patients even when using BMT. Many patients receiving medications associated with ONJ have other comorbidities or conditions, which are likely to increase or may contribute to higher failure rates and the incidence of ONJ, for example, diabetes mellitus and smoking. In a recent review and meta-analysis on the impact of smoking on implant failure, they found a significant increase in the relative risk (RR) of implant failure in patients that smoked >20 cigarettes per day compared with non-smokers; RR = 4 at patient level and RR = 2.45 at implant level [
29].
In the present study, we excluded heavy smokers, and among smokers no correlation was found between smokers and EIF with similar rates of smokers among non-failure and failure both at the patient and implant level. Moraschini et al., found in a systematic review that the number of implant failures does not differ between diabetic and non-diabetic subjects [
30].
In the present study, at patient level, no correlation was found between DM and EIF with similar rates of DM among osseointegrated (15.4%) and EIF groups (12%).χ2 = 0.800, p = 0.371. Similarly, at the implant level (15.1%) vs. (12.3) χ2 = 0.662, p = 0.416 respectively.
A recent review [
31] demonstrated that infection seems to have a major role in the pathogenesis of ONJ. Although there is no conclusive evidence for the infection hypothesis yet, available data have shown a robust association between local infection and ONJ development [
31].
“As evidence that systemic inflammation can promote ONJ, rheumatoid arthritis patients suffer more from ONJ with more serious and intense clinical and radiological appearance of ONJ”. As an additional support for the infection hypothesis, removal of infected ligature form mice induced periodontitis and ONJ demonstrating reduced inflammation and cessation of ONJ progression.
Consequently, implant placement was always performed in clean conditions in healed sites. Implants were not inserted in fresh extraction sites. This may explain the reason for zero ONJ cases following implant placement in the present study.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study comparing EIF in osteoporotic patients treated with BMT to osteoporotic patients without BMT and to non-osteoporotic patients. The results of the present study are in the spirit of recent studies claiming the safety of dental implant installation in osteoporotic patients in general and in those receiving BMT in particular [
32,
33,
34,
35], with success rates of osseointegrated dental implants comparable with rest of the study cohort.
Several new approaches for BMT and osseointegration were suggested. One study examined the effects of raloxifene during bone formation around the dental implant in the ovariectomy-induced osteoporotic rat maxilla. Female Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into three groups (n = 18 each): sham-operated (control), ovariectomized (OVX), and ovariectomized and raloxifene-administered (RAL). Eight weeks after ovariectomy, both upper first molars were extracted, and implants were placed 4 weeks post-extraction. It was concluded that Raloxifene administration enhanced the osteogenic genes and protein expression in the bone around the implant [
36].
Another study aimed to determine the influence of hydrophilic titanium surfaces on gene expression and bone formation during the osseointegration process in an osteoporotic model. Their results supported that hydrophilic surfaces in situations of osteoporosis may provide additional benefits in the early stages of osseointegration [
37].
A recent review [
38] suggests that topographical modifications, improvement in hydrophilicity and the development of controlled-release drug-loading systems to improve cellular adhesion, proliferation and differentiation. Surface modifications, along with drug coating, undoubtedly demonstrate better osseointegration, especially in challenged degenerative conditions, such as osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and osteogenesis imperfecta. Loading substances on modified titanium surfaces may be achieved by mechanisms, such as direct coating, adsorption and incorporating in biodegradable polymers.