Osteoporosis is very common, particularly in post-menopausal women and is characterized by a decrease in bone mass and strength. Osteoporosis also affects the jawbone and it is considered a potential contraindication to placement of dental implants. The present paper reviews the literature regarding the effect of osteoporosis on osseointegration of implants. Experimental models have shown that osteoporosis affects the process of osseointegration, which can be reversed by treatment. However, studies in subjects with osteoporosis have shown no differences in survival of the implants compared to healthy individuals. Therefore, osteoporosis cannot be considered a contraindication for implant placement. Oral bisphosphonates are the most commonly used pharmacological agents in the treatment of osteoporosis. Although there have been cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients treated with bisphosphonates, they are very rare and it is more usually associated with intravenous bisphosphonates in patients with neoplasms or other serious diseases. Nevertheless, patients treated with bisphosphonates must be informed in writing about the possibility of this complication and must give informed consent. Ceasing to use bisphosphonates before implant placement does not seem to be necessary.

Etiological treatment of peri-implantitis aims to reduce the bacterial load within the peri-implant pocket and decontaminate the implant surface in order to promote osseointegration. The aim of this literature review was to evaluate the efficacy of different methods of implant surface decontamination. A search was conducted using the PubMed (Medline) database, which identified 36 articles including in vivo and in vitro studies, and reviews of different decontamination systems (chemical, mechanical, laser and photodynamic therapies). There is sufficient consensus that, for the treatment of peri-implant infections, the mechanical removal of biofilm from the implant surface should be supplemented by chemical decontamination with surgical access. However, more long-term research is needed to confirm this and to establish treatment protocols responding to different implant characterics. Key words:Peri-implantitis, treatment, decontamination, implant surface, laser.

The aim of the present study is to analyze the electrochemical behavior of five different dental alloys: two cobalt-chromium alloys (CoCr and CoCr-c), one nickel-chromium-titanium alloy (NiCrTi), one gold-palladium alloy (Au), and one titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V), and the galvanic effect when they are coupled to titanium implants (TiG2). It was carried out by electrochemical techniques (open circuit measurements, potentiodynamic curves and Zero-Resistance Ammetry) in artificial saliva (AS), with and without fluorides in different acidic conditions. The studied alloys are spontaneously passivated, but NiCrTi alloy has a very narrow passive domain and losses its passivity in presence of fluorides, so is not considered as a good option for implant superstructures. Variations of pH from 6.5 to 3 in artificial saliva do not change the electrochemical behavior of Ti, Ti6Al4V, and CoCr alloys, and couples, but when the pH of the artificial saliva is below 3.5 and the fluoride content is 1000 ppm Ti and Ti6Al4V starts actively dissolving, and CoCr-c superstructures coupled to Ti show acceleration of corrosion due to galvanic effects. Thus, NiCrTi is not recommended for implant superstructures because of risk of Ni ion release to the body, and fluorides should be avoided in acidic media because Ti, Ti6Al4V, and CoCr-c superstructures show galvanic corrosion. The best combinations are Ti/Ti6Al4V and Ti/CoCr as alternative of noble gold alloys.