AIM: To assess the failure and bone-to-implant contact rate of dental implants placed on osteoporotic subjects. METHODS: Extensive examination strategies were created to classify studies for this systematic review. MEDLINE(via Pub Med) and EMBASE database were examined for studies in English up to and including May 2014. The examination presented a combination of the MeS H words described as follow: “osteoporosis” or “osteopenia” or “estrogen deficiency” AND “implant” or “dental implant” or “osseointegration”. Assessment of clinical and/or histological peri-implant conditions in osteoporosis subjects treated with titanium dental implants. The examination included a combination of the MeS H terms described as follow: “osteoporosis” or “osteopenia” or “estrogen deficiency” AND “implant” or “dental implant” or “osseointegration”.RESULTS: Of 943 potentially eligible articles, 12 were included in the study. A total of 133 subjects with osteoporosis, 73 subjects diagnosed with osteopenia and 708 healthy subjects were assessed in this systematic review. In these subjects were installed 367, 205, 2981 dental implants in osteoporotic, osteopenic and healthy subjects, respectively. The failure rate of dental implant was 10.9% in osteoporotic subjects, 8.29% in osteopenic and 11.43% in healthy ones. Bone-to-implant contact obtained from retrieved implants ranged between 49.96% to 47.84%, for osteoporosis and non-osteoporotic subjects. CONCLUSION: Osteoporotic subjects presented higher rates of implant loss, however, there is a lower evidence to strengthen or refute the hypothesis that osteoporosis may have detrimental effects on bone healing. Consequently, final conclusions regarding the effect of osteoporosis in dental implant therapy cannot be made at this time. There are no randomized clinical trial accessible for evaluation and the retrospectivenature of the evaluated studies shall be taken in account when interpreting this study. METHODS: Extensive examination strategies were created to classify studies for this systematic review. MEDLINE (via Pub Med) and EMBASE database were examined for studies in English up to and including May 2014. The examination presented a combination of the MeS H words described as follow: “osteoporosis ” or “osteopenia ” or “estrogen deficiency ” AND “implant ” or dental implant “or ” osseointegration “. Assessment of clinical and / or histological peri-implant conditions in osteoporosis subjects treated with titanium dental implants. The examination includes a combination of the MeS H terms described as follow: ” osteoporosis OR “osteopenia ” or “estrogen deficiency ” AND “implant ” or “dental implant ” or “osseointegration ”. RESULTS: Of 943 potentially eligible articles, 12 were included in the study. of 133 subjects with osteoporosis, 73 subjects diagn osed with osteopenia and 708 healthy subjects were assessed in this systematic review. In these subjects were installed 367, 205, 2981 dental implants in osteoporotic, osteopenic and healthy subjects, respectively. The failure rate of dental implant was 10.9% in osteoporotic subjects, 8.29 % in osteopenic and 11.43% in healthy ones. Bone-to-implant contact obtained from retrieved implants ranged between 49.96% to 47.84% for osteoporosis and non-osteoporotic subjects. CONCLUSION: Osteoporotic subjects presented higher rates of implant loss, however, there has a final evidence regarding the effect of osteoporosis in dental implant therapy can not be made at this time. There are no randomized clinical trial accessible for evaluation and the retrospectivenature of the evaluated studies shall be taken in account when interpreting this study.