Natural History of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Patients With Multiple Myeloma

Abstract

ONJ healed in 75% of patients. Patients with spontaneous ONJ have a higher risk of nonhealing and recurrence. Reinitiating bisphosphonates after healing of ONJ is a reasonable option in patients experiencing relapse who are at risk of skeletal complications. Further studies of the pathogenesis and healing of ONJ are needed.

Nonexposed Variant of Bisphosphonate-associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A Case Series

“…[1][2][3] Since 2003, more than 1000 cases of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw have been documented in the literature, [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] and more than 3500 cases have been reported to the Food and Drug Administration in the US alone. 4,5 Reported prevalence ranges substantially from 0.01% to 28%, [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] and high variability persists after correction for type/potency of bisphosphonates and underlying diseases (high-potency intravenous in cancer patients vs. low-potency oral bisphosphonates in osteoporosis patients). [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] This is more likely to reflect inconsistency and flaws in the collection of data rather than real variations in the prevalence among populations.…”

“…4,5 Reported prevalence ranges substantially from 0.01% to 28%, [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] and high variability persists after correction for type/potency of bisphosphonates and underlying diseases (high-potency intravenous in cancer patients vs. low-potency oral bisphosphonates in osteoporosis patients). [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] This is more likely to reflect inconsistency and flaws in the collection of data rather than real variations in the prevalence among populations. 7 The lack of specific diagnostic criteria and a unanimously accepted definition of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw is possibly the major cause of this epidemiological inconsistency.…”

Oral bisphosphonate induced osteonecrosis of the jaw causing pathological mandibular fracture: literature review and a case report

“…Bugüne kadar İÇKON'un farklı seviyelerinin tedavisine yönelik AAOMS'un görüş bildirgeleri dahil kanıta dayalı bir tedavi prensibi bulunmamaktadır. Literatürde bazı yazarlar uzun süreli antibiyotik ilaç ve antimikrobiyal ağız gargaraları gibi konservatif tedavi seçeneklerini önermektedirler 22,23 ; fakat konservatif yaklaşım literatürde geçen bu vakaların üçte ikisinden daha azında ancak geçici bir iyileşme sağlayabilmektedir [23][24][25] . Buna karşın literatürde lezyonun patolojik kırık, ekstraoral fistül oluşumu gibi daha ileri komplikasyonlara sebep olmadan cerrahi olarak uzaklaştırılmasının, olguların yaklaşık %80'inin tedavisinde başarılı olduğu bildirilmektedir [26][27][28][29][30] .…”

Sunitinib és zoledronsav által indukált állcsont-osteonecrosis

“…Az antimikrobiális öblögetés és antibiotikum-kezelés csupán mintegy 25-50%-ban eredményeznek gyógyulást, szemben a sebészeti eljárások akár 85%-ot meghaladó sikerességével [18,19,20,21,22,23]. A sebészi beavatkozások (sequestrectomia, debridement, reszekció, lézerablatio) sikeressége leginkább az operatőr jártasságától függ [24].…”