Reevaluating antibiotic prophylaxis: insights from a network meta-analysis on dry socket and surgical site infections

Q3 Dentistry
Tayebe Rojhanian, Ahmad Sofi-Mahmudi, Amin Vahdati
{"title":"Reevaluating antibiotic prophylaxis: insights from a network meta-analysis on dry socket and surgical site infections","authors":"Tayebe Rojhanian, Ahmad Sofi-Mahmudi, Amin Vahdati","doi":"10.1038/s41432-024-01067-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Three databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) were searched in December 2021 for 16 Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs). Three reviewers reviewed the articles on oral antibiotic prophylaxis (ABP) for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) and dry socket (DS) after lower third molar (L3M) extraction using the PICO framework. From 1999 to 2021, RCTs involving healthy patients undergoing L3M extraction with ABP, placebo, or no therapy were included. Adverse effects (AEs) associated with antibiotic usage, along with the main outcomes (DS and SSI), were also documented. Three independent investigators selected articles based on pre-established inclusion criteria, with any disagreements resolved by consensus or additional researchers. PRISMA guidelines were followed, involving initial title and abstract screening, followed by full-text evaluation. Exclusion reasons were documented, and the most recent report was included when multiple reports on the same patients were found, with no language restrictions applied. Two investigators evaluated studies quality and quality of evidence respectively using the Cochrane Collaboration tool and GRADEpro GDT. They independently extracted data, focusing on the type of extraction and the number of extracted L3M. They also detailed the use of antibiotics, including dosage, dosage regimen, timing, and duration. Among 16 articles, 15 used a parallel arm design, while one used a crossover design. The antibiotics studied included Amoxicillin+Clavulanic acid (7 articles), Amoxicillin (6), Metronidazole (2), Azithromycin (1), and Clindamycin (2), all compared with no treatment or placebo. A pairwise meta-analysis was used to combine studies with equivalent treatment (direct estimation), and a network meta-analysis compared outcome variables across different treatments (indirect comparison). Two included articles had a low risk of bias and the level of evidence was low according to GRADE. Pooled results supported the use of antibiotics to reduce DS and SSI following L3M extraction with a number needed to treat 25 and 18, respectively. Despite the fact that ABP reduces the risk of DS and SSI, it is recommended to consider systemic conditions and individual patient risk factors before prescribing antibiotics, due to global health threat.","PeriodicalId":12234,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based dentistry","volume":"25 4","pages":"178-179"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01067-7.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01067-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Three databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) were searched in December 2021 for 16 Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs). Three reviewers reviewed the articles on oral antibiotic prophylaxis (ABP) for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) and dry socket (DS) after lower third molar (L3M) extraction using the PICO framework. From 1999 to 2021, RCTs involving healthy patients undergoing L3M extraction with ABP, placebo, or no therapy were included. Adverse effects (AEs) associated with antibiotic usage, along with the main outcomes (DS and SSI), were also documented. Three independent investigators selected articles based on pre-established inclusion criteria, with any disagreements resolved by consensus or additional researchers. PRISMA guidelines were followed, involving initial title and abstract screening, followed by full-text evaluation. Exclusion reasons were documented, and the most recent report was included when multiple reports on the same patients were found, with no language restrictions applied. Two investigators evaluated studies quality and quality of evidence respectively using the Cochrane Collaboration tool and GRADEpro GDT. They independently extracted data, focusing on the type of extraction and the number of extracted L3M. They also detailed the use of antibiotics, including dosage, dosage regimen, timing, and duration. Among 16 articles, 15 used a parallel arm design, while one used a crossover design. The antibiotics studied included Amoxicillin+Clavulanic acid (7 articles), Amoxicillin (6), Metronidazole (2), Azithromycin (1), and Clindamycin (2), all compared with no treatment or placebo. A pairwise meta-analysis was used to combine studies with equivalent treatment (direct estimation), and a network meta-analysis compared outcome variables across different treatments (indirect comparison). Two included articles had a low risk of bias and the level of evidence was low according to GRADE. Pooled results supported the use of antibiotics to reduce DS and SSI following L3M extraction with a number needed to treat 25 and 18, respectively. Despite the fact that ABP reduces the risk of DS and SSI, it is recommended to consider systemic conditions and individual patient risk factors before prescribing antibiotics, due to global health threat.
重新评估抗生素预防措施:干眦和手术部位感染网络荟萃分析的启示。
数据来源:2021 年 12 月,我们在三个数据库(MEDLINE、Cochrane Library 和 Scopus)中检索了 16 项随机临床试验 (RCT):三位审稿人采用 PICO 框架审查了有关口服抗生素预防法 (ABP) 预防下第三磨牙 (L3M) 拔除术后手术部位感染 (SSI) 和干槽症 (DS) 的文章。研究纳入了 1999 年至 2021 年期间进行下第三磨牙拔除术的健康患者接受 ABP、安慰剂或无治疗的 RCT 研究。研究还记录了与抗生素使用相关的不良反应(AEs)以及主要结果(DS和SSI):三位独立研究人员根据事先制定的纳入标准筛选文章,如有任何分歧,则通过协商一致或其他研究人员解决。研究人员遵循 PRISMA 指南,首先对文章标题和摘要进行筛选,然后对全文进行评估。对排除原因进行记录,当发现关于同一患者的多份报告时,则纳入最新报告,且无语言限制。两名研究人员分别使用 Cochrane 协作工具和 GRADEpro GDT 评估研究质量和证据质量。他们独立提取数据,重点关注提取类型和提取的 L3M 数量。他们还详细介绍了抗生素的使用情况,包括剂量、剂量方案、时间和持续时间。在 16 篇文章中,15 篇采用平行臂设计,1 篇采用交叉设计。研究的抗生素包括阿莫西林+克拉维酸(7 篇文章)、阿莫西林(6 篇文章)、甲硝唑(2 篇文章)、阿奇霉素(1 篇文章)和克林霉素(2 篇文章),所有抗生素均与无治疗或安慰剂进行了比较。采用配对荟萃分析将治疗方法相同的研究合并在一起(直接估计),并采用网络荟萃分析比较不同治疗方法的结果变量(间接比较):纳入的两篇文章偏倚风险较低,根据GRADE标准,证据水平较低。汇总结果支持使用抗生素减少L3M拔管后的DS和SSI,治疗需要量分别为25和18:尽管 ABP 可降低 DS 和 SSI 的风险,但鉴于全球健康威胁,建议在处方抗生素前考虑全身情况和患者的个体风险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evidence-based dentistry
Evidence-based dentistry Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Evidence-Based Dentistry delivers the best available evidence on the latest developments in oral health. We evaluate the evidence and provide guidance concerning the value of the author''s conclusions. We keep dentistry up to date with new approaches, exploring a wide range of the latest developments through an accessible expert commentary. Original papers and relevant publications are condensed into digestible summaries, drawing attention to the current methods and findings. We are a central resource for the most cutting edge and relevant issues concerning the evidence-based approach in dentistry today. Evidence-Based Dentistry is published by Springer Nature on behalf of the British Dental Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信