In the present study, the impacts on success rates between three different antibiotic regimes in patients receiving preventive tooth extraction during/after antiresorptive treatment were compared. For the retrospective analysis, we enrolled patients who had undergone tooth extraction from 2009 to 2019 according to the specified preventive conditions under antiresorptive therapy. Three antibiotic regimens were distinguished: (Group 1) intravenous for 7 days, (Group 2) oral for 14 days, and (Group 3) oral for 7 days of application. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw at 12 weeks after surgery. A total of 760 patients and 1143 extraction regions were evaluated (Group 1 n = 719; Group 2 n = 126; Group 3 n = 298). The primary endpoint showed no significant difference in the development of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw between the groups studied (Group 1 n = 50/669 (7%); Group 2 n = 9/117 (7%); Group 3 n = 17/281 (6%); p = 0.746). Overall, the success rate was 93% after intervention when preventive measures were followed. With the same success rate, a reduced, oral administration of antibiotics seems to be sufficient regarding the possible spectrum of side effects, the development of resistance and the health economic point of view.

Oliver Ristow, Lena Hürtgen, Julius Moratin, Maximilian Smielowski, Christian Freudlsperger, Michael Engel, Jürgen Hoffmann, Thomas Rückschloß. JKAOMS 2021;47:99-111. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2021.47.2.99

Surgical therapy of osteoradionecrosis of the jaw (ORN) is challenging and requires treatment of the affected hard and soft tissue. To understand how tissue injury after irradiation influences surgical outcomes, the objective of this study was to find out whether (a) bone-related, (b) soft tissue-related, and (c) treatment-related parameters influence the surgical success of patients with ORN. A total of 175 patients (324 lesions) were included in this retrospective, single-center study. All patients were diagnosed with ORN and underwent surgical therapy. The primary outcome was complete soft tissue recovery (mucosa/skin) and the absence of symptoms 3 months after surgery. At the time of follow-up, 58% of patients (189 of 324 lesions) had intact intraoral or extraoral soft tissue. The extent of bone destruction had no effect on treatment success, whereas soft tissue injury due to fibrosis (OR: 0.344; CI 0.142–0.834; p = 0.01818) and xerostomia (OR: 0.163; CI 0.064–0.419; p = 0.00016) increased the probability of treatment failure. Soft tissue reconstruction with a microvascular graft improved therapeutic success compared to local wound closure (OR: 2.998; CI 1.371–6.555; p = 0.006). Thus, for the treatment of ORN, it is extremely important to pay attention not only to the extent of bone destruction but especially to soft tissue defects. Because the extent of soft tissue injury is a predictor for therapeutic success, it should influence the choice of surgical treatment.

Background and Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of surgical and conservative, non-surgical treatment on general health-related (QoL) and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in patients suffering from AAOMS stage I MRONJ. Materials and Methods: In the course of this prospective clinical study, QoL and OHRQoL using QLQ-C30 and QHIP G14 questionnaire were longitudinally assessed in N = 174 prospectively enrolled patients with indication of treatment of MRONJ stage I over a period of 12 months. Patients received conservative or surgical treatment. The measurement time points were preoperatively (T0), 12 weeks (T1), 6 months (T2) and 1 year after operation (T3). Results: For OHRQoL, no significant (p > 0.05) differences were found between both treatment groups for all timepoints (T0–T3). In the surgical treatment group, OHIP scores of T1, T2 and T3 were significantly lower than baseline measures (T0) (T0–T1 (2.99, p = 0.024), T0–T2 (5.20, p < 0.001), T0–T3 (7.44, p < 0.001)). For conservative treatment group OHIP, scores of T2 and T3 were significantly lower than baseline measures (T0) (T0–T2 (9.09, p = 0.013), T0–T3 (12.79, p < 0.001)). There was no statistically significant effect of time on QLQ-C30 scores in both groups (surgical treatment: F(3, 174) = 1.542, p < 0.205, partial η² = 0.026; conservative treatment: F(3, 30) = 0.528, p = 0.667, partial η² = 0.050). QLQ-C30 scores turned out to be significantly lower in the non-surgical group at T1 (p = 0.036) and T3 (p = 0.047) compared to the surgical treatment group. Conclusions: Surgical and conservative treatment of MRONJ stage I significantly improves patients’ OHRQoL. Surgical treatment is superior to conservative treatment of MRONJ stage I regarding general QoL. Therefore, surgical treatment of MRONJ stage I should not be omitted for QoL reasons.