Skip to main content
Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) logoLink to Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences)
. 2022 Jun 28;54(6):1190–1195. [Article in Chinese] doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2022.06.022

药物相关颌骨骨坏死的病理特点及临床治疗策略

Analysis of pathological characteristics of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw and discussion of clinical treatment strategies based on the pathological analysis results

Yu-xing GUO 1, Jian-yun ZHANG 2, Dian-can WANG 1, Chuan-bin GUO 1,*
PMCID: PMC9761830  PMID: 36533354

Abstract

Objective

To summarize the pathological characteristics of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) specimens after jaw curettage or jaw osteotomy treatment and to comprehensively analyze the relationship between the different pathological features, treatment methods, and treatment effects to provide new ideas for effective treatment of MRONJ in clinical work.

Methods

The clinical and pathological data were collected from 23 patients with MRONJ who were treated with curettage (18 patients) and jaw osteotomy (5 patients) at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of Peking University Hospital of Stomatology between June 2014 and December 2015. The pathological characteristics of MRONJ were summarized and analyzed with treatment effects based on various surgical treatment methods. The diagnostic criteria and disease staging of MRONJ were determined according to the 2014 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon's Position Paper.

Results

In this study, 5 patients have treated with jaw segmental osteotomy, and all of them were in stage Ⅲ; the other 18 patients were treated with jaw curettage, including 5 patients in stage Ⅱ and 13 patients in stage Ⅲ. The pathological features of MRONJ in five cases of jaw segmental osteotomy were divided into three adjacent regions from shallow to deep: inflammation region (IR), sclerosis region (SR), and bone remodeling layer (BRL). Moreover, three types of pathological features of specimens from traditional curettage were defined as type 1 (IR), type 2 (IR + SR), and type 3 (IR + SR + BRL). The pathological features of the patients treated with jaw curettage were: type Ⅰ, 38.9% (7/18); type Ⅱ, 44.4% (8/18); type Ⅲ, 16.7% (3/18). Complete healing was achieved in 5 patients treated with jaw segmental osteo-tomy. Moreover, 2 cases with type Ⅰ, 1 case with type Ⅱ, and 1 with type Ⅲ completely healed after jaw curettage, while 5 cases with type Ⅰ, 7 cases with type Ⅱ, and 2 cases with type Ⅲ experienced recurrence after surgery.

Conclusion

Pathological features of continuous regions of inflammation, sclerosis, and bone remodeling layer were identified from shallow to deep, based on the microscopic observation of jaw segmental osteotomy samples. Insufficient removal of the sclerotic region during jaw curettage that blocks the required blood, nutritional factors, and mesenchymal stem cells seems to be a common cause for failed treatment of MRONJ after curettage surgery.

Keywords: Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw, Pathological characteristics, Jaw curettage, Jaw segmental osteotomy


药物相关颌骨骨坏死(medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw, MRONJ)一直是困扰口腔医生的临床难题,目前还没有广泛、公认的有效治疗方法[1]。目前治疗方案主要分为保守治疗(抗生素、漱口液和高压氧等)和手术治疗(颌骨刮治、颌骨区段截骨)两大类,而手术治疗的临床效果要优于保守治疗[2-3]。手术治疗MRONJ的方法大多基于临床经验,缺少充分的证据支持[4]。本研究是一项关于MRONJ疾病的临床回顾性研究,总结MRONJ病理特点,分析不同治疗方法的病理表现及其与预后的关系,以期为MRONJ疾病的治疗提供思路。

1. 资料与方法

1.1. 病例资料

选取2014年6月至2015年12月北京大学口腔医院就诊并采用手术治疗(颌骨刮治和颌骨区段截骨)的23例MRONJ患者。

1.2. MRONJ诊断标准

参照2014年美国口腔颌面外科医师协会提出的定义: (1)以往或目前正在应用抗骨吸收或抗血管生成药物;(2)口内、外骨暴露或经过口内、外瘘口可以探及骨面,骨不愈合时间超过8周;(3)颌骨未曾接受过放疗,或无明确的颌骨转移灶[5]。需要全部满足以上3条内容才能诊断为MRONJ。MRONJ临床分为5期,即(1)风险期: 患者有口服或静脉应用二膦酸盐药物史,没有出现明显颌骨坏死;(2)0期: 没有发现临床可见的颌骨坏死,但是有非特异性的临床表现、影像变化和症状;(3)Ⅰ期: 有暴露的坏死颌骨,或经瘘管可探及骨,但患者没有明显不适和感染症状;(4)Ⅱ期: 暴露的坏死颌骨,或经瘘管可探及骨,同时存在感染症状,如疼痛、骨暴露区皮肤/黏膜红肿,可伴发或不伴脓液;(5)Ⅲ期: 有暴露的坏死颌骨,或经瘘管可探及骨,同时存在感染症状(疼痛)外,还存在至少1项以下症状: 坏死及暴露的死骨超过牙槽骨范围(如达下颌骨下缘、下颌升支、上颌窦、颧骨),产生病理性骨折,口外皮肤瘘口,口腔上颌窦或口鼻腔相通,或者骨质溶解达下颌骨下缘或上颌窦底。

1.3. 收集基线资料

收集患者临床信息,包括原发疾病,二膦酸盐、地舒单抗和/或抗血管生成药物用药时间、用药方式、用药途径、频率,是否长期应用激素和共患疾病,牙齿不适时间、部位等。

1.4. 手术方法

颌骨区段截骨: 根据影像表现确定MRONJ颌骨病灶,于病灶外2 cm行区段截骨,骨创面见正常血运,这种方法主要用于下颌骨病变,尤其是接近下颌骨下缘的Ⅲ期患者。

颌骨刮治: 于病变周围2颗正常牙范围设计梯形或角型切口,翻黏骨膜瓣,首先去除位于病变表面疏松肉芽组织,如果有松动游离死骨也一并去除。根据影像表现确定MRONJ病灶范围,以动力钻行死骨搔刮或方块截骨至颌骨断面肉眼观颜色正常,磨平骨创边缘。如果伤口张力过大,可行骨膜切开减张,拉拢黏骨膜瓣严密缝合伤口。

1.5. 病理分析

手术标本采用10%(质量分数)中性福尔马林固定,标本置于20%(质量分数)乙二胺四乙酸(ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, EDTA)溶液室温摇床脱钙2~4周,脱钙满意后,梯度乙醇脱水,二甲苯透明,石蜡包埋,进行层厚5~7 μm组织切片,再行HE染色,于光学显微镜下观察并拍照。

病理观察由经验丰富的病理专业医生完成,并明确病理特征,其分为两个阶段,第一阶段: 分析5例颌骨区段截骨患者标本,确定MRONJ疾病整体病理特征;第二阶段: 分析18例颌骨刮治患者标本,并将其病理表现与MRONJ疾病整体病理特征进行比较分析,进行病理特征分类。

1.6. 临床随访

所有患者进行定期随访,在术后3、6个月或根据临床需要进行影像复查。

1.7. 统计学分析

采用Prism 7.0软件分析MRONJ病理特征与分期和预后的关系,利用Kaplan-Meier分析不同MRONJ分期患者颌骨刮治术后复发时间特点,P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2. 结果

2.1. 临床特征

本组患者共计23例,其中男性11例,女性12例,平均年龄61.04岁(44~81岁),< 50岁7例,≥50岁16例。最常见的肿瘤为乳腺癌(9例)和肾癌(6例),其他恶性肿瘤还包括前列腺癌、肺癌、膀胱癌、食管癌和多发性骨髓瘤共计8例。抗骨吸收药物的平均用药时间为41.13个月(10~96个月),最常见药物为帕米膦酸二钠和唑来膦酸。多数患者还同时联合应用常规化疗药(紫杉醇、顺铂、羟喜树碱、环磷酰胺和卡培他滨)和抗血管生成靶向药物(舒尼替尼、阿西替尼、厄洛替尼和索拉非尼),应用抗血管生成药物患者发生颌骨骨髓炎时间较应用常规化疗药缩短[18例常规化疗患者发生MRONJ时的用药时间(44.72±26.21)个月,5例抗血管生成药患者发生MRONJ时的用药时间(28.20±18.01)个月]。23例患者中有17例患者既往有拔牙历史。MRONJ发生在上颌骨8例,下颌骨11例,上下颌骨同时发生4例。MRONJ疾病临床分期中Ⅱ期患者5例,Ⅲ期患者18例。采用颌骨区段截骨方法治疗5例患者,采用颌骨刮治方法治疗18例患者(表 1)。

表 1.

患者临床资料

Patient clinical data

Items Clinical data (n=23)
MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.
Male/female, n 11/12
Age/years
  Mean 61.04
  Range 44-81
≥50 years, n 16
< 50 years, n 7
Type of cancer, n
  Breast 9
  Kidney 6
  Prostate 2
  Lung 2
  Bladder 2
  Esophageal 1
  Multiple myeloma 1
Antiresorptive therapy/month
  Mean duration of antiresorptive therapy before first visit 41.13±25.26(range: 10-96)
Type of antiresorptive therapy, n
  Zoledronate 10
  Pamidronate 10
  Zoledronate + pamidronate 3
Mean duration of clinical symptoms before treatment/month 13.78±19.84(range: 2-96)
Trigger of MRONJ lesion, n
  Extraction 17
  Spontaneous 6
MRONJ location, n
  Maxilla 8
  Mandible 11
  Both maxilla and mandible 4
MRONJ stage, n
  Grade 2 5
  Grade 3 18
Treatment methods, n
  Jaw curettage 18
  Jaw segmental osteotomy 5
Mean duration until MRONJ relapse post treatment/month 5.71±4.08(range: 1-15)

2.2. 病理特征

MRONJ疾病整体病理特征: 5例颌骨区段截骨手术标本经过HE染色观察,MRONJ病理特征可以分为如下3个连续区域: (1)炎症区: 肉芽组织内可见较多炎症细胞、菌团,可伴或不伴过度矿化的游离死骨,死骨块内无细胞核(图 1A);(2)骨硬化区: 炎症区被骨硬化区包绕,可见至少连续8~140个空骨陷窝,提示此段区域内无血运或血运极差[6-7](图 1B);(3)骨反应带: 在骨硬化区和正常骨之间可见骨反应带,靠近正常骨侧可见较多细胞分布,推测可能为活跃的成骨细胞或破骨细胞(图 1C)。

图 1.

药物相关颌骨骨坏死病理特征及分类

Pathological features observed by analyzing histological sections of MRONJ lesions

A-C, histological sections from MRONJ samples; D, schematic drawing showing the histological changes resulting from MRONJ, black arrows indicate IR, SR, and NB. Type 1, labeled with the blue arrow, represents the IR region; type 2, labeled with the green arrow, represents the IR and SR region; type 3, labeled with the yellow arrow, represents the three regions IR, SR, and BRL. The black arrow points to BRL, filled with abundant cells. MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw; IR, inflammation region; SR, sclerosis region; BRL, bone reaction layer; NB, normal bone; S, sequestrum. Scale bars, 100 μm. D, the sketch figure, no scale bars.

图 1

颌骨刮治术标本病理特征: 为更好分析颌骨刮治术的标本病理表现特征,我们将仅包括炎症区的表现定义为Ⅰ类特征(type 1),包括炎症区和骨硬化区的表现定义为Ⅱ类特征(type 2),而包括炎症区、骨硬化区和骨反应带的表现定义为Ⅲ类特征(type 3,图 1D)。

18例颌骨刮治术患者的病理表现特征如下: Ⅰ类特征38.9%(7/18),Ⅱ类特征44.4%(8/18),Ⅲ类特征16.7%(3/18)。

2.3. 颌骨刮治术标本病理特征与治疗效果关系的分析

根据以上病理特征的分类,可以反向推测Ⅰ类病理特征的病例手术刮治最浅,其次是Ⅱ类病理特征的病例,手术刮治最为深入的是Ⅲ类病理特征病例。18例颌骨刮治术患者中,Ⅱ期患者5例,Ⅲ期患者13例。Ⅱ期MRONJ患者手术标本病理特征分别为Ⅰ类病理特征3例和Ⅱ类病理特征2例,没有见到Ⅲ类病理特征;Ⅲ期MRONJ患者手术标本病理特征分别为Ⅰ类病理特征3例,Ⅱ类病理特征7例,Ⅲ类病理特征3例(图 2A),这提示在处理Ⅱ期MRONJ病灶时,刮治深度相对也较浅(Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类病理特征),而处理Ⅲ期MRONJ病灶时,刮治深度也相应地加深了(出现了Ⅲ类病理特征)。

图 2.

药物相关颌骨骨坏死手术标本病理特征分类与临床分期、治疗方法的相关性分析

Relation of the MRONJ stage and treatment results with pathological types distribution

A, pathological features of surgical specimens in MRONJ patients with stage Ⅱ and stage Ⅲ; B, pathological features of patients who completely healed after jaw curettage and the pathological features of patients who had recurrence after surgery; C, relapse timing in MRONJ patients with stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ after jaw curettage was similar (P > 0.05). MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

图 2

我们接下来分析了不同颌骨刮治深度后的治疗效果,发现完全愈合的患者中病理特征分别为Ⅰ类2例,Ⅱ类和Ⅲ类各1例;而术后出现复发的患者中病理特征分别为Ⅰ类5例,Ⅱ类7例,Ⅲ类2例,这提示手术刮治深(Ⅲ类病理特征,2例)较手术刮治较浅(Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类病理特征,5例和7例)的患者复发可能性要小(图 2B)。

我们进一步利用Kaplan-Meier生存分析法比较了不同MRONJ分期患者颌骨刮治术后复发时间特点,发现Ⅱ和Ⅲ期MRONJ患者复发的时间趋势比较接近(图 2CP>0.05)。

3. 讨论

目前在口腔临床工作中MRONJ越来越常见,其主要是由长期应用抗骨吸收药物和/或抗血管生成药物引起的口腔并发症,患者可以出现口腔颌面部感染、颌骨暴露甚至骨折[5]。2003年Marx[8]报道使用帕米膦酸二钠或唑来膦酸后出现颌骨坏死,主要表现为颌骨疼痛、骨质暴露,常规手术和药物治疗无效,此后有大量的文献报道类似病例[9]。二膦酸盐是人工合成的无机化焦磷酸盐类似物,具有细胞毒性作用,通过抑制破骨细胞活性降低骨质吸收,因而常用于治疗骨质疏松、恶性肿瘤骨转移、骨髓瘤和Paget’s病等[3]。根据其化学结构,二膦酸盐药物可分为非含氮双膦酸盐药物(依替膦酸钠、氯膦酸钠和替鲁膦酸盐)和含氮二膦酸盐药物(帕米膦酸二钠、唑来膦酸和阿仑膦酸钠等),后者临床应用广泛,作用机制为抑制甲羟戊酸途径中的法尼基焦磷酸合成酶。二膦酸盐药物与骨组织结合后可在体内聚集持续影响骨代谢,导致骨坏死,即使停止使用,其在骨内仍将长期作用[10-11]。本组患者均有帕米膦酸二钠或唑来膦酸用药史,联合应用抗血管生成靶向药物患者发生MRONJ时间较常规化疗药患者缩短,提示血管生成障碍在MRONJ发病过程中有重要作用。

目前有3个主要风险因素可引起MRONJ: (1)牙槽创伤;(2)感染;(3)免疫状态紊乱。许多学者发现拔牙(牙槽创伤)是引起MRONJ最为常见的危险因素,在发生MRONJ的患者中大多数有拔牙经历(58%~86%)[9, 12]。有MRONJ潜在风险的拔牙患者中,拔牙指征主要为牙周炎和根尖周炎。最近一项临床研究提示,在有拔牙指征(有如疼痛、肿胀、流脓、瘘管等症状)MRONJ潜在患者中,发现多数患者(28/40)在拔牙时牙创周围已经存在死骨[13],这些研究提示在抗骨吸收药物和/或抗血管生成药物条件下的牙源性感染是MRONJ疾病的始发因素,而牙槽创伤是促发因素,因此,我们推测MRONJ的发病过程如下,一旦牙槽骨出现炎症(如牙周炎和根尖周炎),在该炎症范围外周出现相应的骨代谢活跃带,而该活跃带增多的破骨细胞会造成抗骨吸收药物(主要是二膦酸盐药物)沉积(图 3A)。骨吸收作用受到抑制会造成致密的骨硬化区包绕软组织炎症,该层区域的特点为骨质硬化、血管减少、成骨细胞数量减少甚至死亡(图 3B),这个阶段患者表现为Ⅰ期MRONJ的临床特点,虽然临床上没有明显的感染(溢脓)症状,但是局部微弱炎症可持续存在。由于牙周炎或根尖周炎可引起明显不适,尤其龋坏导致的根尖周炎引起的压力不如牙周炎容易得到释放,从而引起患者疼痛明显,进而寻求口腔医生进行拔牙。牙齿松动自然脱落或拔牙后骨创暴露,进而细菌加剧炎症侵犯骨硬化区,骨面暴露(或瘘管)出现,因外周骨硬化区对血运的阻断而不能发生骨愈合(图 3C),因此,我们推断拔牙创面不能愈合的根本原因是因为骨硬化区阻断了周围血运及成骨细胞活动。拔牙窝内炎症的进一步加剧会促使软组织炎症突破骨硬化区,造成死骨分离,但这时在这个混杂着死骨与软组织炎症的外周会进一步被新的骨硬化区包裹(图 3D)。在骨硬化区与正常骨质之间会有一层骨增生活跃带(骨反应带),硬化区一侧骨质吸收受阻,骨质形成加剧,而另一侧则为健康骨质。

图 3.

牙源性感染引起药物相关颌骨骨坏死发病过程示意图

Pathogenesis of odontogenic MRONJ

A, pulpitis and periodontitis are common causes of alveolar bone inflammation; B, alveolar bone inflammation is associated with the production of osteoclasts, which are also the targets of anti-bone resorption drugs (mainly bisphosphonate drugs), then alveolar bone inflammation is surrounded by sclerotic region, characterized by bone sclerosis, micro-vessels, and osteoblasts decrease or disappearance; C, due to the blockage of blood flow in the peripheral bone sclerosis region, the healing of the teeth socket exposed by the spontaneous loss or extraction is delayed or impaired; D, further intensification of inflammation in the teeth socket will cause it to break through the bone sclerosis region, resulting in separation of the sequestrum, still, at this time, the outer periphery mixed with sequestrum and soft tissue inflammation will be further wrapped by a new bone sclerosis region. MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

图 3

病理标本整体观察可将MRONJ病变由浅入深分为炎症区、骨硬化区、骨反应带三个区域。随着MRONJ进展,位于牙窝侧的细菌毒力逐步增强,会逐步侵蚀硬化区骨质造成骨质崩解,在病理切片上表现为细菌及死骨混杂的现象,这时患者可能会表现为Ⅱ期MRONJ的特点,即口腔出现明显感染症状(溢脓或瘘管不愈)。骨硬化区是为了自身防护而形成的一种保护机制,一旦这种保护无法抵抗细菌毒力,骨硬化区就会进一步扩大。MRONJ疾病如此顽固很有可能与药物特点直接相关,临床最为常用的二膦酸盐药物,在血液循环内的半衰期约0.5~2 h,但其与骨组织结合后,有报道说可存在10年以上[11],因此,此类患者即使停药,MRONJ也不易缓解。

目前临床常用的MRONJ治疗方法为颌骨刮治术和颌骨区段截骨术。我们发现颌骨区段截骨术效果理想,很少复发,而颌骨刮治术后常见复发。我们通过将颌骨刮治术标本病理特征与MRONJ整体病理特点比较,发现颌骨刮治时经常将炎症区的腐败坏死组织进行刮除,而骨硬化区多数腐败坏死组织没有得到充分去除,骨愈合所需要的血运及成骨、破骨细胞被骨硬化区阻断,进而出现MRONJ复发。

为了解决骨硬化区去除不充分容易引起MRONJ复发,充分去除骨硬化区后担心颌骨骨折的问题,我们借鉴了种植植骨手术中将植骨床进行打孔制备骨管操作(cortical perforation)的思路,在临床进行颌骨刮治后对剩余健康骨质进行打孔操作,让深面及颊舌侧的骨膜血运通过制备的骨管进入骨创,促进骨创的愈合。这样的临床处理技术我们已经开始尝试了一些病例,初步结果表明多数因应用抗骨吸收药物引起的MRONJ患者采用骨管技术后软组织创口可以一期愈合,患者可以恢复正常的生活质量[14]。同时,应用以上分析结果制定的翻瓣联合骨管技术对MRONJ潜在风险患者进行拔牙,初步结果证明可以安全、有效地预防MRONJ的发生[15]

综上所述,MRONJ病变由浅入深的病理表现可分为炎症区、骨硬化区、骨反应带。颌骨刮治术治疗MRONJ复发的常见原因为术中未充分去除骨硬化区,其阻断了骨创愈合所需要的血运及成骨细胞、破骨细胞。MRONJ手术治疗中对于骨硬化区的充分去除可提高手术效果,但下颌骨存在骨质缺损过多容易引起骨折风险。

Funding Statement

北京大学口腔医院青年科研基金(PKUSS20160115)和国家自然科学基金(81900979)

Supported by the Research Foundation of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology (PKUSS20160115) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81900979)

References

  • 1.Sacco R, Sacco N, Hamid U, et al. Microsurgical reconstruction of the jaws using vascularised free flap technique in patients with medication-related osteonecrosis: A systematic review. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:9858921. doi: 10.1155/2018/9858921. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Rupel K, Ottaviani G, Gobbo M, et al. A systematic review of therapeutical approaches in bisphosphonates-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) Oral Oncol. 2014;50(11):1049–1057. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2014.08.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.郭 玉兴, 王 佃灿, 王 洋, et al. 二膦酸盐药物治疗乳腺癌骨转移发生颌骨坏死的临床特点. 北京大学学报(医学版) 2016;48(1):80–83. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-167X.2016.01.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hayashida S, Soutome S, Yanamoto S, et al. Evaluation of the treatment strategies for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ) and the factors affecting treatment outcome: A multicenter retrospective study with propensity score matching analysis. J Bone Miner Res. 2017;32(10):2022–2029. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.3191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ruggiero SL, Dodson TB, Fantasia J, et al. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons position paper on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: 2014 update. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;72(10):1938–1956. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2014.04.031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Basi DL, Hughes PJ, Thumbigere-Math V, et al. Matrix metalloproteinase-9 expression in alveolar extraction sockets of Zoledronic acid-treated rats. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(11):2698–2707. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2011.02.065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Yamashita J, Koi K, Yang DY, et al. Effect of zoledronate on oral wound healing in rats. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(6):1405–1414. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Marx RE. Pamidronate (aredia) and zoledronate (zometa) induced avascular necrosis of the jaws: A growing epidemic. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;61(9):1115–1117. doi: 10.1016/S0278-2391(03)00720-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ruggiero SL, Mehrotra B, Rosenberg TJ, et al. Osteonecrosis of the jaws associated with the use of bisphosphonates: A review of 63 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;62(5):527–534. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2004.02.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lin JT, Lane JM. Bisphosphonates. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2003;11(1):1–4. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200301000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Di Fede O, Panzarella V, Mauceri R, et al. The dental management of patients at risk of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: new paradigm of primary prevention. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:2684924. doi: 10.1155/2018/2684924. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Shintani T, Hayashido Y, Mukasa H, et al. Comparison of the prognosis of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw caused by oral and intravenous bisphosphonates. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44(7):840–844. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2015.03.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Nicolatou-Galitis O, Papadopoulou E, Vardas E, et al. Alveolar bone histological necrosis observed prior to extractions in patients, who received bone-targeting agents. Oral Dis. 2020;26(5):955–966. doi: 10.1111/odi.13294. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Guo Y, Guo C. Enhancement of bone perfusion through cortical perforations to improve healing of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: A retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;50(6):740–745. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2020.07.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.郭 玉兴, 王 佃灿, 刘 筱菁, et al. 翻瓣联合骨管技术拔牙方案在药物相关性颌骨坏死潜在风险患者中的应用初探. 中华口腔医学杂志. 2021;56(5):452–457. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20210104-00003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) are provided here courtesy of Editorial Office of Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban, Peking University Health Science Center

RESOURCES