Martin Bengtsson, Aron Naimi-Akbar, Joakim Johansson-Berggren, Sebastian Dybeck-Udd, Mikael Magnusson, Bodil Lund
{"title":"The Importance of Antibiotics in Facial Fracture Treatment-A Systematic Meta-Review.","authors":"Martin Bengtsson, Aron Naimi-Akbar, Joakim Johansson-Berggren, Sebastian Dybeck-Udd, Mikael Magnusson, Bodil Lund","doi":"10.3390/cmtr18040048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-review evaluated the possibility of more specified recommendations in antibiotic treatment through a narrowed focus on facial trauma. The aim was to analyze the effect of different regimens of antibiotic in treatment of skeletal trauma to the face. The knowledge mapping was based on existing systematic reviews (SRs) on trials specified in a PICO: Participants (P): Adults and children, diagnosed with fractures to the facial skeleton. Interventions (I): Antibiotic intervention. Comparator (C): Placebo, no antibiotics. Outcomes (O): Postoperative infection, pain, re-operation, other complications, healing deficiencies, (Oral) Health related Quality of Life, removal of osteosynthesis, adverse reactions. The literature search in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science according to PRISMA resulted in 1487 records. A COVIDENCE selection process resulted in 29 articles retrieved and read in full text revealing 10 articles eligible for evaluated according to ROBIS. Three SRs were considered to have low risk of bias and constituted the final evidence evaluation. The meta-review of these SRs did not provide sufficient support for prolonged antibiotic treatment after surgical intervention of midfacial fractures in comparison with antibiotics only the first day postoperatively. No support for antibiotic treatment for conservatively managed fractures alone was found. This review is limited by a relatively low number of included SRs. However, tendencies in outcomes suggests a restricted duration of antibiotics in treatment of facial fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":46447,"journal":{"name":"Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction","volume":"18 4","pages":"48"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12641708/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/cmtr18040048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This meta-review evaluated the possibility of more specified recommendations in antibiotic treatment through a narrowed focus on facial trauma. The aim was to analyze the effect of different regimens of antibiotic in treatment of skeletal trauma to the face. The knowledge mapping was based on existing systematic reviews (SRs) on trials specified in a PICO: Participants (P): Adults and children, diagnosed with fractures to the facial skeleton. Interventions (I): Antibiotic intervention. Comparator (C): Placebo, no antibiotics. Outcomes (O): Postoperative infection, pain, re-operation, other complications, healing deficiencies, (Oral) Health related Quality of Life, removal of osteosynthesis, adverse reactions. The literature search in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science according to PRISMA resulted in 1487 records. A COVIDENCE selection process resulted in 29 articles retrieved and read in full text revealing 10 articles eligible for evaluated according to ROBIS. Three SRs were considered to have low risk of bias and constituted the final evidence evaluation. The meta-review of these SRs did not provide sufficient support for prolonged antibiotic treatment after surgical intervention of midfacial fractures in comparison with antibiotics only the first day postoperatively. No support for antibiotic treatment for conservatively managed fractures alone was found. This review is limited by a relatively low number of included SRs. However, tendencies in outcomes suggests a restricted duration of antibiotics in treatment of facial fractures.
本荟萃综述通过缩小对面部创伤的关注,评估了抗生素治疗中更具体建议的可能性。目的是分析不同抗生素治疗方案对面部骨骼创伤的影响。知识图谱是基于PICO中指定的试验的现有系统评价(SRs):参与者(P):诊断为面部骨骼骨折的成人和儿童。干预措施(一):抗生素干预。比较物(C):安慰剂,不含抗生素。结果(O):术后感染、疼痛、再手术、其他并发症、愈合缺陷、(口腔)健康相关的生活质量、取骨术、不良反应。根据PRISMA在PubMed、Cochrane Library和Web of Science进行文献检索,得到1487条记录。在进行covid选择过程后,检索并阅读了29篇文章的全文,其中10篇文章符合ROBIS评估的条件。3个SRs被认为具有低偏倚风险,构成最终证据评价。与仅在术后第一天使用抗生素相比,对这些SRs的荟萃评价并没有提供足够的支持,支持在手术干预后延长抗生素治疗面中骨折。没有发现单独使用抗生素治疗保守治疗骨折的支持。由于纳入的sr数量相对较少,本综述受到限制。然而,结果的趋势表明抗生素治疗面部骨折的持续时间有限。