-
Clinical Oral Investigations Mar 2023To evaluate the effect of subgingival administration of various antimicrobials and host-modulating agents in furcation defects as an adjunct to scaling and root planing... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of subgingival administration of various antimicrobials and host-modulating agents in furcation defects as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) compared to SRP alone or combined with placebo.
METHODS
A systematic review was carried out using MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for articles up to October 2022 in addition to hand searches. All longitudinal studies that evaluated the effect of subgingival application of antimicrobial and host-modulating agents in furcation defects as adjuncts to SRP compared to SRP alone or SRP + placebo with at least 3 months of follow-up were eligible for inclusion.
RESULTS
A total of eight studies were included. Superior clinical treatment outcomes were shown when alendronate, rosuvastatin, boric acid, simvastatin, and tetracycline (only at 3 months) were utilized in furcation defects in conjunction with SRP alone or SRP + placebo. Significant improvement was reported in radiographic bone defect depth and defect depth reduction when SRP was supplemented with alendronate, rosuvastatin, boric acid, and simvastatin.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of this review, the adjunctive subgingival administration of medications and host-modulating agents in furcation defects may confer additional clinical and radiographic benefits than non-surgical periodontal treatment alone. Future investigations are needed to confirm their long-term effectiveness.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Local host modulators and antimicrobials may be used supplementary to enhance the clinical and radiographic treatment outcomes of conventional periodontal therapy in furcation defects.
Topics: Humans; Furcation Defects; Rosuvastatin Calcium; Alendronate; Periodontitis; Dental Scaling; Root Planing; Treatment Outcome; Simvastatin
PubMed: 36729235
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-04871-0 -
Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine... Feb 2020The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Chinese herbal medicines for invigorating the kidney (CHMIK) on senile osteoporosis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Chinese herbal medicines for invigorating the kidney (CHMIK) on senile osteoporosis.
METHODS
We searched for studies in English-language databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) and Chinese-language databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang Data, VIP Chinese periodical service platform, and China Biology Medicine disc from their inception to September 2017. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of Traditional Chinese Medicine therapies (alone or in combination) and conventional clinical medicine therapies among older adult patients with osteoporosis were identified. We conducted a network Meta-analysis with a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model using RStudio software, Version 3.4.1.
RESULTS
Forty-three randomized controlled trials assessing the differences between Traditional Chinese Medicine and conventional clinical medicine were identified, including 15 treatments and involving 3316 patients. The results of the network Meta-analysis indicated that alendronate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.047-0.73) and calcium (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.11-0.30) are significantly more effective if combined with oral CHMIK. CHMIK alone is significantly more effective than both alendronate (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.10-1.0) and calcium (OR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.056-0.28). Moreover, CHMIK + tuina + calcium is more effective than CHMIK + calcium + vitamin D + alendronate (OR = 18.0, 95% CI: 1.1-2.7e + 02).
CONCLUSION
The present network Meta-analysis found that alendronate and calcium are more effective if combined with oral CHMIK and that oral CHMIK alone may be more effective than alendronate or calcium. Tuina may have an advantage over oral medicines. Oral CHMIK and calcitonin show the most potential for treating senile osteoporosis.
Topics: Humans; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Osteoporosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32227762
DOI: No ID Found -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Nov 2016Our network meta-analyses compared the efficacy of different bisphosphonates preventing fractures for primary osteoporosis. By including 36 studies, we found that... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Our network meta-analyses compared the efficacy of different bisphosphonates preventing fractures for primary osteoporosis. By including 36 studies, we found that zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing vertebral fracture, nonvertebral fracture, and any fracture, and alendronate or zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing hip fracture.
INTRODUCTION
This study was conducted in order to analyze the available evidence on the efficacy of bisphosphonates for preventing fractures.
METHODS
We considered randomized trials comparing any bisphosphonate with other bisphosphonate or placebo. We searched Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed and manually searched reference list of relevant articles. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed. The primary outcome is vertebral fracture. Secondary outcomes include nonvertebral fracture, hip fracture, wrist fracture, and any fracture.
RESULTS
Thirty-six studies were included. Significant difference was found between bisphosphonates for vertebral fracture and nonvertebral fracture (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.04, respectively). Compared with placebo, alendronate, clodronate, ibandronate, minodronate, pamidronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid significantly prevented vertebral fracture. Zoledronic acid significantly reduced the risk of vertebral fracture, compared with alendronate, clodronate, etidronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and tiludronate (0.65 (0.46, 0.91), 0.53 (0.33, 0.86), 0.45 (0.27, 0.74), 0.52 (0.36, 0.75), 0.59 (0.42, 0.83), and 0.31 (0.21, 0.48), respectively). Compared with etidronate, clodronate and zoledronic acid significantly prevented nonvertebral fracture. Compared with alendronate, zoledronic acid significantly prevented any fracture. The possibility rankings showed that zoledronic ranked first in preventing vertebral fracture, hip fracture, and any fracture, and pamidronate ranked first in preventing nonvertebral fracture and wrist fracture. In the sensitivity analyses, zoledronic acid ranked first in preventing nonvertebral fracture, and alendronate ranked first in preventing hip fracture and wrist fracture.
CONCLUSION
Zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing vertebral fracture, nonvertebral fracture, and any fracture, and alendronate or zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing hip fracture. Uncertainty still remains and future studies are needed to accurately evaluate the comparative efficacy of bisphosphonates.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Female; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Osteoporosis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27273112
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-016-3654-z -
Journal of Oral Biology and... 2021Previous systematic reviews showed additional benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonates (BP) in the treatment of periodontitis. In contrast, it is unclear the effect of BP in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Previous systematic reviews showed additional benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonates (BP) in the treatment of periodontitis. In contrast, it is unclear the effect of BP in patients with diabetes and smokers, its pooled effect when administered locally or systemically is also unknown.
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to systematically review the literature about the use of BP as adjuvant to nonsurgical scaling and root planning (SRP).
METHODOLOGY
This study followed the PRISMA guideline. This study included randomized clinical trials that administered locally or systemically BPs as adjuvant for periodontal treatment. Five databases were used. Meta-analyses were performed, using the pooled mean differences (MD) for clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD). Standard mean difference (SMD) was used for radiographic assessment (RADIO). Subgroup analyses were performed for locally delivered meta-analyses, considering diabetes and smoking exposure.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies were included. It was showed MD of 1.52 mm (95%CI: 0.97-2.07) and 1.44 mm (95%CI: 1.08-1.79) for PPD reduction and CAL gain, respectively, for locally delivered BP. BP was not able to provide significant improvements in smokers (subgroup analysis) when considering CAL (MD: 1.37; 95%CI: -0.17-2.91) and PPD (MD: 1.35; 95%CI: -0.13-2.83). Locally delivered BP also improved significantly the RADIO assessments (SMD: 4.34; 95%CI: 2.94-5.74). MD for systemically administered BP was 0.40 mm (95%CI: 0.21-0.60), 0.51 mm (95%CI: 0.19-0.83) and 1.05 (95%CI: 0.80-1.31) for PPD, CAL and RADIO, respectively.
CONCLUSION
The administration of BP in adjunct to SRP may result in additional clinical effects.
PubMed: 33537188
DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2021.01.008 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2021Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for osteoporosis and is more prevalent among people with CKD than among people who do not have CKD. Although... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for osteoporosis and is more prevalent among people with CKD than among people who do not have CKD. Although several drugs have been used to effectively treat osteoporosis in the general population, it is unclear whether they are also effective and safe for people with CKD, who have altered systemic mineral and bone metabolism.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for osteoporosis in patients with CKD stages 3-5, and those undergoing dialysis (5D).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing any anti-osteoporotic drugs with a placebo, no treatment or usual care in patients with osteoporosis and CKD stages 3 to 5D were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed their quality using the risk of bias tool, and extracted data. The main outcomes were the incidence of fracture at any sites; mean change in the bone mineral density (BMD; measured using dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry (DXA)) of the femoral neck, total hip, lumbar spine, and distal radius; death from all causes; incidence of adverse events; and quality of life (QoL). Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven studies involving 9164 randomised participants with osteoporosis and CKD stages 3 to 5D met the inclusion criteria; all participants were postmenopausal women. Five studies included patients with CKD stages 3-4, and two studies included patients with CKD stages 5 or 5D. Five pharmacological interventions were identified (abaloparatide, alendronate, denosumab, raloxifene, and teriparatide). All studies were judged to be at an overall high risk of bias. Among patients with CKD stages 3-4, anti-osteoporotic drugs may reduce the risk of vertebral fracture (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.69; low certainty evidence). Anti-osteoporotic drugs probably makes little or no difference to the risk of clinical fracture (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.05; moderate certainty evidence) and adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00; moderate certainty evidence). We were unable to incorporate studies into the meta-analyses for BMD at the femoral neck, lumbar spine and total hip as they only reported the percentage change in the BMD in the intervention group. Among patients with severe CKD stages 5 or 5D, it is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of clinical fracture (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug improves the BMD at the femoral neck because the certainty of this evidence is very low (MD 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.02). Anti-osteoporotic drug may slightly improve the BMD at the lumbar spine (MD 0.03, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.04, low certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in the included studies. It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of death (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.22 to 4.56; very low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with CKD stages 3-4, anti-osteoporotic drugs may reduce the risk of vertebral fracture in low certainty evidence. Anti-osteoporotic drugs make little or no difference to the risk of clinical fracture and adverse events in moderate certainty evidence. Among patients with CKD stages 5 and 5D, it is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of clinical fracture and death because the certainty of this evidence is very low. Anti-osteoporotic drug may slightly improve the BMD at the lumbar spine in low certainty evidence. It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug improves the BMD at the femoral neck because the certainty of this evidence is very low. Larger studies including men, paediatric patients or individuals with unstable CKD-mineral and bone disorder are required to assess the effect of each anti-osteoporotic drug at each stage of CKD.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bias; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Denosumab; Female; Femur Neck; Fractures, Spontaneous; Hip; Humans; Indoles; Lumbar Vertebrae; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Parathyroid Hormone-Related Protein; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Spinal Fractures; Teriparatide; Thiophenes; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 34231877
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013424.pub2 -
Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences Jul 2023The chief aim in managing periodontal diseases is the elimination of causative factors that may vary from pathogens to physical parameters. In the current systematic...
INTRODUCTION
The chief aim in managing periodontal diseases is the elimination of causative factors that may vary from pathogens to physical parameters. In the current systematic review, the effectiveness of "" as a supplement to ")" in the management of periodontitis is calibrated from the previous studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An extensive online search in the various databanks of EMBASE, Medline, Pubmed, and Scopus was conducted. The keywords searched were "Probing depth (PD)" which was the main endpoint, and variations in " (CAL)" and/or " (BD) fill" were the secondary variants that were searched for in the current study. The data collected were tabulated and compared using the means and the standard deviations. Using the random effect method the mean variations and the confidence intervals (95%) of the parameters were assessed.
RESULTS
Eight studies were finalized. Alendronate was utilized as a supplement to SRP in seven studies, four of which employed topical administration and three of which used oral alendronate. A substantial grade of heterogeneity for Probing depth ( < 0.0001), Clinical Attachment Level ( = 0.007), and Bone Defect fill ( < 0.0001) was observed amongst groups when comparing the properties of adjunctive BT to SRP alone. In comparison to SRP alone, SRP with bisphosphonate treatment significantly reduced PD ( = 0.002), increased CAL ( = 0.008), and filled BD ( < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Although BT as an adjunct appears to be successful in treating periodontitis, its practical applicability is questionable due to the possibility of developing jaw osteonecrosis and the short-range follow-up of the research.
PubMed: 37654331
DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_504_22 -
Dental Traumatology : Official... Apr 2017Replantation of avulsed teeth may lead to root resorption. Bisphosphonates (BPs), a class of drugs of used to treat resorptive diseases of the bone such as osteoporosis... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/AIM
Replantation of avulsed teeth may lead to root resorption. Bisphosphonates (BPs), a class of drugs of used to treat resorptive diseases of the bone such as osteoporosis and Paget's disease, have been observed to exert an antiresorptive effect on periodontal bone as well. The antiresorptive properties of BPs could prove them useful in preventing root resorption of replanted avulsed teeth. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze and summarize the currently available literature concerning the use of BPs in preventing root resorption of avulsed teeth.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Embase databases were searched using keywords 'bisphosphonate', 'replantation', and 'tooth'. Quality assessment of each study was carried out. In addition, general characteristics and outcomes of each study were summarized.
RESULTS
After exclusion of 116 irrelevant articles, 10 animal studies were included in this review. The majority of the studies suggest that surface application of zoledronate or alendronate reduces root resorption of replanted teeth in animal models. Surface treatment with etidronate had no significant effect on root resorption, and intracanal etidronate accelerated resorption.
CONCLUSION
Surface application of zoledronate and alendronate reduces root resorption of replanted teeth in animal models. However, the efficacy of intracanal usage of BPs is still debatable.
Topics: Animals; Diphosphonates; Humans; Root Resorption; Tooth Replantation
PubMed: 27960049
DOI: 10.1111/edt.12316 -
Current Medical Research and Opinion Aug 2014Compare the efficacy of bazedoxifene with oral bisphosphonates for reduction of vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal osteoporotic (PMO) women and in higher-risk... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Compare the efficacy of bazedoxifene with oral bisphosphonates for reduction of vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal osteoporotic (PMO) women and in higher-risk patients based on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
Eight RCTs assessing vertebral fracture risk reduction with oral bisphosphonates (n = 7) or bazedoxifene (n = 1) were identified by a systematic literature review. Individual study results were pooled in a network meta-analysis (NMA) to indirectly compare treatment effects for overall PMO women and a higher-risk subgroup (FRAX ≥ 20%). Three sets of NMA analyses were conducted: aggregate data (AD) from the bisphosphonate RCTs and bazedoxifene RCT for the full population or the FRAX ≥20% subgroup (NMA AD); bisphosphonate AD and bazedoxifene AD from each FRAX subgroup adjusted for baseline risk (NMA AD meta-regression); and bisphosphonate AD and bazedoxifene individual patient data (IPD) adjusted for baseline risk/FRAX (NMA AD/IPD meta-regression).
RESULTS
For the overall population, bisphosphonates had lower fracture risks versus bazedoxifene although there is considerable uncertainty in supporting one intervention over another. The relative risk reduction (RRR) for bazedoxifene was -0.23 (95% CrI: -1.11, 0.27) versus ibandronate, -0.17 (-0.76, 0.22) versus alendronate, and -0.06 (-0.62, 0.30) versus risedronate. RESULTS from the meta-regression analyses were similar. For the FRAX ≥20% population, estimated fracture rates with bazedoxifene were lower than with bisphosphonates, but again the uncertainty limits strong interpretation. The RRR for bazedoxifene was 0.51 (-0.31, 0.83) versus ibandronate, 0.53 (-0.18, 0.83) versus alendronate, and 0.57 (-0.07, 0.85) versus risedronate. The meta-regression analyses showed comparable findings.
CONCLUSION
The analyses only considered vertebral fractures for oral bisphosphonates versus bazedoxifene, and IPD was available only for bazedoxifene. In light of this, bazedoxifene is comparable to bisphosphonates in the overall PMO population and at least as effective as bisphosphonates for preventing vertebral fractures among higher-risk PMO patients. The findings suggest bazedoxifene performs better in higher-risk PMO than in the overall PMO.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Female; Humans; Indoles; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Regression Analysis; Spinal Fractures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24773456
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2014.908279 -
Otology & Neurotology : Official... Jun 2022To systematically review the evidence for the use of bisphosphonate therapy in otosclerosis through clinically relevant outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the evidence for the use of bisphosphonate therapy in otosclerosis through clinically relevant outcomes.
DATABASES REVIEWED
MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and CINAHL databases were searched up to July 12, 2021.
METHODS
RCTs and cohort studies investigating the effect of bisphosphate therapy on adults or children diagnosed with otosclerosis were included. The risk of bias within trials was examined using the ROB2 tool for RCTs, and the ROBINS-I for non-RCTs.
RESULTS
Three studies reported over five publications were included in the systematic review. Data from one RCT at 6 months did not demonstrate any improvement nor deterioration in audiological outcomes in participants treated with Sodium Alendronate. Data from MRI in this group demonstrated improvements in the SI of the otosclerotic foci at the RAOW compared to participants taking placebo. In another RCT, improvements in audiological outcomes were seen at 12 and 24 months in individuals treated with Etidronate Sodium. Long-term data from a retrospective cohort study demonstrated stabilisation of hearing in individuals with otosclerosis and progressive SNHL.
CONCLUSION
There is insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of bisphosphonates in otosclerosis patients at present. Long-term retrospective data has suggested a role for bisphosphonates in the subset of patients with deteriorating sensorineural hearing loss with the aim of hearing stabilisation. Adequately powered RCTs with long term follow up will be required to evaluate this further.
Topics: Adult; Child; Diphosphonates; Etidronic Acid; Hearing Loss, Sensorineural; Humans; Otosclerosis; Retrospective Studies; Sodium
PubMed: 35213475
DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003510 -
Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism Nov 2014Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of bone resorption, widely used for the management of osteoporosis and fracture prevention. Recent evidence suggests that... (Review)
Review
Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of bone resorption, widely used for the management of osteoporosis and fracture prevention. Recent evidence suggests that bisphosphonates may have beneficial effects in the treatment of thalassemia-associated osteoporosis, a complex and multifactorial condition. Here we summarise available data about the efficacy and tolerability of bisphosphonates in beta--thalassemic patients. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of bisphosphonates in beta-thalassemia were identified searching PubMed. Studies were reviewed to retrieve relevant clinical information. The following variables were considered to assess the safety and efficacy of bisphosphonates-bone mineral density (BMD), markers of bone turnover, incidence of fragility fracture, bone pain, back pain, and clinical adverse events. Five RCTs were identified, investigating alendronate, clodronate, zoledronic acid and neridronate. All bisphosphonates produced a significant decrease of the markers of bone turnover. Alendronate, neridronate, and zoledronic acid significantly improved BMD at the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip. Zoledronic acid and neridronate were also shown to reduce bone and back pain. Probably due to the small sample sizes and to the short duration of the trials, it was not possible to establish the anti-fracture efficacy of bisphosphonates; however, they were well tolerated and adverse events were rare but expected on the basis of previous studies. Sufficient evidence exists to support the use of bisphosphonates in the management of thalassemia-associated osteoporosis (to prevent bone loss and improve the BMD). Further research is warranted to establish their anti-fracture efficacy and long-term safety.
Topics: Animals; Diphosphonates; Humans; Osteoporosis; PubMed; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; beta-Thalassemia
PubMed: 24748165
DOI: 10.1007/s00774-014-0584-8