双膦酸盐治疗患者种植牙:系统回顾。

IF 1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research Pub Date : 2018-09-30 eCollection Date: 2018-07-01 DOI:10.5037/jomr.2018.9302
Rokas Gelazius, Lukas Poskevicius, Dalius Sakavicius, Vaidas Grimuta, Gintaras Juodzbalys
{"title":"双膦酸盐治疗患者种植牙:系统回顾。","authors":"Rokas Gelazius,&nbsp;Lukas Poskevicius,&nbsp;Dalius Sakavicius,&nbsp;Vaidas Grimuta,&nbsp;Gintaras Juodzbalys","doi":"10.5037/jomr.2018.9302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The review aims to study dental implant placement purposefulness for patients who have been treated or are on treatment with bisphosphonate medication.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Structured search strategy was applied on electronic databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central and ResearchGate. Scientific publications in English between 2006 and 2017 were identified in accordance with inclusion, exclusion criteria. Publication screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed. Outcome measures included implant failure or implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 32 literature sources were reviewed, and 9 of the most relevant articles that are suitable to the criteria were selected. Heterogeneity between the studies was found and no meta-analysis could be done. Five studies analysed intraoral bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement, three studies investigated intravenous bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement and one study evaluated both types of medication given in relation with implant placement. Patients with intraoral therapy appeared to have a better implant survival (5 implants failed out of 423) rate at 98.8% vs. patients treated intravenously (6 implants failed out of 68) at 91%; the control group compared with intraoral bisphosphonate group appeared with 97% success implant survival rate (27 implants failed out of 842), showing no significant difference in terms of success in implant placement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates seemed to have a higher chance of developing implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. The intraorally treated patient group appeared to have more successful results. Implant placement in patients treated intraorally could be considered safe with precautions.</p>","PeriodicalId":53254,"journal":{"name":"eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5037/jomr.2018.9302","citationCount":"38","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dental Implant Placement in Patients on Bisphosphonate Therapy: a Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Rokas Gelazius,&nbsp;Lukas Poskevicius,&nbsp;Dalius Sakavicius,&nbsp;Vaidas Grimuta,&nbsp;Gintaras Juodzbalys\",\"doi\":\"10.5037/jomr.2018.9302\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The review aims to study dental implant placement purposefulness for patients who have been treated or are on treatment with bisphosphonate medication.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Structured search strategy was applied on electronic databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central and ResearchGate. Scientific publications in English between 2006 and 2017 were identified in accordance with inclusion, exclusion criteria. Publication screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed. Outcome measures included implant failure or implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 32 literature sources were reviewed, and 9 of the most relevant articles that are suitable to the criteria were selected. Heterogeneity between the studies was found and no meta-analysis could be done. Five studies analysed intraoral bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement, three studies investigated intravenous bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement and one study evaluated both types of medication given in relation with implant placement. Patients with intraoral therapy appeared to have a better implant survival (5 implants failed out of 423) rate at 98.8% vs. patients treated intravenously (6 implants failed out of 68) at 91%; the control group compared with intraoral bisphosphonate group appeared with 97% success implant survival rate (27 implants failed out of 842), showing no significant difference in terms of success in implant placement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates seemed to have a higher chance of developing implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. The intraorally treated patient group appeared to have more successful results. Implant placement in patients treated intraorally could be considered safe with precautions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5037/jomr.2018.9302\",\"citationCount\":\"38\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2018.9302\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2018.9302","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

摘要

目的:本综述旨在研究已接受或正在接受双膦酸盐药物治疗的患者种植体放置的目的性。材料与方法:在MEDLINE、PubMed、PubMed Central和ResearchGate等电子数据库中采用结构化检索策略。根据纳入、排除标准对2006年至2017年的英文科学出版物进行筛选。进行出版物筛选、数据提取和质量评估。结果测量包括种植体失败或种植体相关的颌骨骨坏死。结果:共查阅文献32篇,筛选出符合标准的相关文献9篇。研究之间存在异质性,无法进行meta分析。五项研究分析了口服双膦酸盐药物与种植体放置的关系,三项研究调查了静脉注射双膦酸盐药物与种植体放置的关系,一项研究评估了两种类型的药物与种植体放置的关系。口腔内治疗的患者种植体存活率(423例中有5例种植体失败)为98.8%,而静脉内治疗的患者(68例中有6例种植体失败)为91%;对照组与口腔内双膦酸盐组相比,种植体成活率为97%(842颗种植体中有27颗失败),种植体放置成功率无显著差异。结论:静脉注射双膦酸盐治疗的患者似乎有更高的机会发生种植体相关性颌骨骨坏死。口服治疗组似乎有更成功的结果。经口内治疗的患者种植体放置可以被认为是安全的,但要注意预防。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dental Implant Placement in Patients on Bisphosphonate Therapy: a Systematic Review.

Objectives: The review aims to study dental implant placement purposefulness for patients who have been treated or are on treatment with bisphosphonate medication.

Material and methods: Structured search strategy was applied on electronic databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central and ResearchGate. Scientific publications in English between 2006 and 2017 were identified in accordance with inclusion, exclusion criteria. Publication screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed. Outcome measures included implant failure or implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

Results: In total, 32 literature sources were reviewed, and 9 of the most relevant articles that are suitable to the criteria were selected. Heterogeneity between the studies was found and no meta-analysis could be done. Five studies analysed intraoral bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement, three studies investigated intravenous bisphosphonate medication in relation with implant placement and one study evaluated both types of medication given in relation with implant placement. Patients with intraoral therapy appeared to have a better implant survival (5 implants failed out of 423) rate at 98.8% vs. patients treated intravenously (6 implants failed out of 68) at 91%; the control group compared with intraoral bisphosphonate group appeared with 97% success implant survival rate (27 implants failed out of 842), showing no significant difference in terms of success in implant placement.

Conclusions: Patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates seemed to have a higher chance of developing implant-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. The intraorally treated patient group appeared to have more successful results. Implant placement in patients treated intraorally could be considered safe with precautions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Outcome Difference between Short and Longer Dental Implants Placed Simultaneously with Alveolar Bone Augmentation: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Use of Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Sinus Floor Augmentation Surgery: a Systematic Review. Attitudes of Oral Surgeons and Periodontists towards Immediate Dental Implant Placement. Can CAPRIN-1 Be Responsible for the Recurrence Potential of Odontogenic Keratocysts? Dental Implant Placement in the Maxilla Following Ridge Augmentation with Free Iliac Bone Graft and Oral Rehabilitation with Fixed Prosthesis: a Three-Year Follow-Up Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1