The effectiveness of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing local complications after tooth extraction. A systematic review.

Q1 Dentistry
Saverio Marchionni, Paolo Toti, Antonio Barone, Ugo Covani, Marco Esposito
{"title":"The effectiveness of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing local complications after tooth extraction. A systematic review.","authors":"Saverio Marchionni,&nbsp;Paolo Toti,&nbsp;Antonio Barone,&nbsp;Ugo Covani,&nbsp;Marco Esposito","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the beneficial or harmful effects of systemic prophylactic antibiotics at extraction of teeth, apart from third molars, vs no antibiotic or placebo administration. Furthermore, if antibiotics are beneficial, to determine which type, dosage, duration and timing of administration is the most effective.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 30 January 2016) and MEDLINE (1 January 1950 to 30 January 2016) were searched. There were no language or date restrictions placed on the searches of the electronic databases. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of parallel group design, with a follow-up of at least 2 weeks, comparing the administration of various prophylactic antibiotic regimens vs no antibiotics to people undergoing extraction of teeth, not including third molars, were included. Outcome measures were postoperative complications/adverse events, post-operative pain and swelling. Screening of eligible studies, assessment of the risk of bias of the trials and data extraction were conducted in triplicate by three independent review authors. Results were to be expressed as risk ratios (RRs) using a random-effects model for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity, including both clinical and methodological factors, was to be investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No relevant RCT was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is no RCT to determine if the antibiotic therapy is needed at extraction of teeth, excluding third molars. Properly designed and conducted RCTs are needed to understand the role of the antibiotic therapy for tooth extraction. Conflict-of-interest statement: This systematic review was self-funded and the authors have no conflict of interests to declare.</p>","PeriodicalId":49259,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","volume":"10 2","pages":"127-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the beneficial or harmful effects of systemic prophylactic antibiotics at extraction of teeth, apart from third molars, vs no antibiotic or placebo administration. Furthermore, if antibiotics are beneficial, to determine which type, dosage, duration and timing of administration is the most effective.

Materials and methods: The Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 30 January 2016) and MEDLINE (1 January 1950 to 30 January 2016) were searched. There were no language or date restrictions placed on the searches of the electronic databases. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of parallel group design, with a follow-up of at least 2 weeks, comparing the administration of various prophylactic antibiotic regimens vs no antibiotics to people undergoing extraction of teeth, not including third molars, were included. Outcome measures were postoperative complications/adverse events, post-operative pain and swelling. Screening of eligible studies, assessment of the risk of bias of the trials and data extraction were conducted in triplicate by three independent review authors. Results were to be expressed as risk ratios (RRs) using a random-effects model for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity, including both clinical and methodological factors, was to be investigated.

Results: No relevant RCT was identified.

Conclusions: There is no RCT to determine if the antibiotic therapy is needed at extraction of teeth, excluding third molars. Properly designed and conducted RCTs are needed to understand the role of the antibiotic therapy for tooth extraction. Conflict-of-interest statement: This systematic review was self-funded and the authors have no conflict of interests to declare.

全身性抗生素预防拔牙后局部并发症的有效性。系统回顾。
目的:评估除第三磨牙外,拔牙时系统预防性抗生素与不使用抗生素或安慰剂的有益或有害影响。此外,如果抗生素是有益的,确定哪种类型、剂量、持续时间和给药时间是最有效的。材料和方法:检索Cochrane口腔健康组试验注册(至2016年1月30日)和MEDLINE(1950年1月1日至2016年1月30日)。对电子数据库的搜索没有语言或日期限制。采用平行组设计的随机对照试验(rct),随访至少2周,比较拔牙患者(不包括第三磨牙)使用各种预防性抗生素与不使用抗生素的情况。结局指标为术后并发症/不良事件、术后疼痛和肿胀。合格研究的筛选、试验偏倚风险的评估和数据提取由三位独立的综述作者进行。结果用风险比(rr)表示,使用随机效应模型进行二分类结果,95%置信区间(ci)。异质性,包括临床和方法学因素,将被调查。结果:未发现相关的RCT。结论:除第三磨牙外,没有随机对照试验确定拔牙时是否需要抗生素治疗。需要适当设计和实施随机对照试验,以了解抗生素治疗在拔牙中的作用。利益冲突声明:本系统综述为自筹经费,作者无利益冲突需要声明。
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
European Journal of Oral Implantology
European Journal of Oral Implantology DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.35
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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