Study Clinical parameters Antiresorptive
treatment 		Evaluation interval
(years) 		Results Conclusions
Mayta-Tovalino
et al. [22] 		RBL, PD NR: regarding timing or suspension of bisphosphonate therapy 11 (2006 to 2017) The implant failure rate was 18%, corresponding to 23 lost implants.
The cumulative implant survival rate decreased over time: 99% in the first two years, decreasing to 38% between eleven and twelve years 		The survival rate showed a decline over time (Kaplan Meier), with a high percentage of survival in the first few years and a significant reduction in the survival rate after a decade
Dvorak et al. [30] NR NR: antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis 6 (SD 4) (range 1 to 24) Peri-implantitis in 13% of implants The study did not find a significant association between osteoporosis and peri-implantitis or implant loss in an adult female population
Shabestari et al. [31] BOP, PD, RBL TE, mobility Bisphosphonate use prior to implant placement 4.2 (range 0.6 to 8.1) Patients were considered free of peri-implantitis Being treated with oral bisphosphonates before and after implant placement does not appear to compromise osseointegration or the clinical and radiographic condition of the implants
Seki et al. [32] PD 6 mm, RBL ≥ 25%, suppuration NS: regarding timing or suspension of bisphosphonate therapy 11.8 Peri-implantitis was significantly higher in the systemic disease group Osteoporosis was the third most significant cause of peri-implantitis
Renvert et al. [33] BY, BOP, suppuration, PD NR: antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis 4 (2007 to 2011) The study does not find that diseases such as osteoporosis are associated with peri-implantitis because there was a low prevalence rate in the study sample No significant association was found between peri-implantitis and osteoporosis
Bell and Bell [34] BOP, PD, RBL, OM Bisphosphonate use prior to implant placement 3.1 (range 0.4 to 7.5) Five implants failed for other reasons. The implant success rate was 95%, comparable to 97% in patients without bisphosphonates, with no evidence of OM Patients taking oral BPs are not at increased risk of implant failure compared to other patients
Astolfi et al. [35] PD, mBOP, BPI, suppuration, recession, RBL NR: antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis 6.7 (range 1 to 9) Peri-implantitis in < 25% of implants placed in patients with osteoporosis Systemic diseases such as osteoporosis do not show a significant influence on the incidence of peri-implantitis
Suvarna et al. [36] PD, BOP, RBL, mobility, BPI Bisphosphonate use prior to implant placement 3, follow-up after implant placement There were 10 cases of implant failure, resulting in a success rate of over 92%.
No jaw osteonecrosis was found in any patient. The implants demonstrated functional stability, with no significant differences between patients on bisphosphonate therapy and other patients 		No significant risk of implant failure is observed in patients receiving bisphosphonate treatment
Apaza-Bedoya et al. [37] BOP, suppuration, mPI, PD, KM, MR, RBL NR: antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis 2.52 (range 12 to 90 months) There was a significant association between the development of peri-implantitis and mucositis with osteoporosis The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was significantly correlated with osteoporosis
Romandini et al. [38] Presence of plaque, depth of recession, BOP, PD, suppuration,
RBL ≥ 2 mm 		NR: antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis 7.8 The association between osteoporosis and peri-implantitis was not established as a significant risk factor in the final multivariate logistic regression model Osteoporosis was not identified as a major risk factor for peri-implantitis

BPI = bacterial plaque index; TE = thread exposure; mPI = modified plaque index; KM = keratinized mucosa; MR = marginal recession; NS = not specified; NR = not recorded; RBL = radiographic bone loss; PD = probing depth; BOP = bleeding on probing; mBOP = modified bleeding on probing; OM = osteonecrosis of the jaw.