Owen Brandon, Bradley Hannah
Oral Surgery/Oral Medicine DCT3, Glasgow Dental Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Restorative Dentistry DCT3, Aberdeen Dental Hospital, Aberdeen, UK.
Evid Based Dent. 2021 Jan;22(3):108-109. doi: 10.1038/s41432-021-0196-9.
Data sources Four electronic databases, namely PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, were searched from their inception to 16 July 2019. The OpenGrey database was also used to identify unpublished studies.Study selection Eligible study designs included randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and case series with a retrospective, cross-sectional or prospective design related to implant placement in patients with a history of anti-angiogenic or antiresorptive medications. Selection was conducted by two independent reviewers; however, if a consensus was not reached, a third reviewer was involved. Studies required a minimum of five patients with a history of antiresorptive or anti-angiogenic drug therapy before implant placement and strict criteria were used to ensure studies reported sufficient data items for discussion. Only full papers in the English language were included.Data extraction and synthesis A total of 6,073 papers were initially identified following removal of duplicates and 29 of these met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Twenty-eight reported on bisphosphonates which included five cohort studies, six case-control studies and 17 case series. A single case series reported on denosumab and no studies were identified reporting on selective oestrogen receptor modulators, calcitonin or anti-angiogenics. The quality of the included cohort and case-control studies were assessed by applying the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale while the case series were assessed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist. A score of <50% was considered to indicate low quality, 50-70% moderate quality and >75% high quality. A standardised Microsoft Excel spreadsheet was used to extract data from the studies which included study design, number of cases, implants and controls, patient characteristics (systemic diseases/age/gender/smoking status), drug history (type of drug, indication, administration route, intake before implant placement), whether patients were taking the drug at the time of implant placement and follow-up, reported outcome and parameters (implant loss, failure, success, survival and incidence of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw [MRONJ]). Where data was missing, estimations were calculated and a qualitative synthesis of all data was performed.Results No single study reported all the relevant data required by the authors and the overall level of quality was moderate. Regarding implant failure, patients with a history of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis are not at increased risk. However, insufficient data was available for those with a history of bisphosphonates for cancer, or any other antiresorptive or anti-angiogenic medications. Comparing this to MRONJ, patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment are at risk of developing MRONJ following implant placement, while those with a history of denosumab for osteoporosis have a negligible risk. There was insufficient data available to assess the risk of MRONJ for those with a history of denosumab for cancer or other antiresorptive or anti-angiogenic medications.Conclusions Patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment are at risk of MRONJ following implant placement while patients who take bisphosphonates for osteoporosis are not at increased risk of implant failure. There is a negligible risk of developing MRONJ in those taking denosumab for osteoporosis. However, practitioners should bear in mind a lack of high-quality evidence regarding the safety of placing implants in patients with a history of antiresorptive or anti-angiogenic medications.
数据来源 检索了四个电子数据库,即PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库,检索时间从建库至2019年7月16日。还使用OpenGrey数据库来识别未发表的研究。
研究选择 符合条件的研究设计包括随机对照试验、队列研究、病例对照研究以及与有抗血管生成或抗吸收药物治疗史患者的种植体植入相关的回顾性、横断面或前瞻性设计的病例系列。由两名独立的评审员进行筛选;然而,如果未达成共识,则引入第三名评审员。研究要求在种植体植入前至少有五名有抗吸收或抗血管生成药物治疗史的患者,并且使用严格的标准来确保研究报告了足够的数据项以供讨论。仅纳入英文全文。
数据提取与综合 去除重复项后,最初共识别出6073篇论文,其中29篇符合本系统评价的纳入标准。28篇报告了双膦酸盐,包括五项队列研究、六项病例对照研究和17项病例系列。一项病例系列报告了地诺单抗,未识别出关于选择性雌激素受体调节剂、降钙素或抗血管生成药物的研究。采用改良的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估纳入的队列研究和病例对照研究的质量,而病例系列则根据乔安娜·布里格斯研究所的批判性评价清单进行评估。得分<50%被认为质量低,50 - 70%为中等质量,>75%为高质量。使用标准化的Microsoft Excel电子表格从研究中提取数据,包括研究设计、病例数、种植体和对照、患者特征(全身性疾病/年龄/性别/吸烟状况)、用药史(药物类型、适应证、给药途径。种植体植入前的摄入量)、患者在种植体植入和随访时是否正在服用该药物、报告的结局和参数(种植体丢失、失败、成功、存活以及颌骨药物相关性骨坏死[MRONJ]的发生率)。若数据缺失,则进行估算,并对所有数据进行定性综合分析。
结果 没有一项研究报告了作者所需的所有相关数据,总体质量水平为中等。关于种植体失败,有骨质疏松症双膦酸盐治疗史的患者风险未增加。然而,对于有癌症双膦酸盐治疗史或任何其他抗吸收或抗血管生成药物治疗史的患者,数据不足。与MRONJ相比,有双膦酸盐治疗史的患者在种植体植入后有发生MRONJ的风险,而有骨质疏松症地诺单抗治疗史的患者风险可忽略不计。没有足够的数据来评估有癌症地诺单抗治疗史或其他抗吸收或抗血管生成药物治疗史的患者发生MRONJ的风险。
结论 有双膦酸盐治疗史的患者在种植体植入后有发生MRONJ的风险,而因骨质疏松症服用双膦酸盐的患者种植体失败风险未增加。因骨质疏松症服用地诺单抗的患者发生MRONJ的风险可忽略不计。然而,从业者应牢记,关于有抗吸收或抗血管生成药物治疗史的患者植入种植体安全性的高质量证据不足。