Implant presence-triggered osteonecrosis: A scoping review

Unlike medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), implant presence-triggered osteonecrosis of the jaw (IPTO) is not well appreciated. Recent reports have suggested a mechanical aetiology unique to osseointegrated dental implants that may be responsible for this phenomenon. A scoping review was performed to consolidate the available evidence. Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. Studies that described or evaluated the development of IPTO in osseointegrated implants, which were placed prior to the commencement of anti-resorptive or anti-angiogenic agents, were included. Twenty-three (23) articles were included in this study. Patient characteristics, aetiopathogenesis, presentation, and treatment of the disease were evaluated. Most studies suggested a 6-month period between dental implant insertion and the commencement of anti-resorptive therapy as a criterion for IPTO. Both infective and mechanical processes were reported to be involved in the pathogenesis of IPTO. Most patients required surgical intervention to achieve resolution. While there are several knowledge gaps regarding IPTO, the evidence points towards a continuum in the pathogenesis of the disease, whereby there is a mechanical cause followed by secondary infection. Similar to typical MRONJ, the severity and treatment required also vary. Persistent peri‑implantitis features around a dental implant should alert the clinician to the possibility of IPTO in patients taking anti-resorptive or anti-angiogenic agents. Prompt identification of the disease may play a role in timely management or appropriate referrals.