Bacteremia After Oral Surgery and Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Endocarditis

Hall, G.; Heimdahl, Anders; Nord, Carl Erik

doi:10.1086/520134

Cited by 58 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 66 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This would support the belief that surgical procedure at infected sites is more likely to produce bacteremia 4 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Such bacteremia is a potential cause of infective endocarditis (bacterial endocarditis) in patients with congenital or acquired cardiac anomalies, and in these instances the infection can be life-threatening [1][2][3][4] . It is therefore recommended that 'at-risk' patients receiving procedures that could induce bacteremias should receive prophylactic treatment [1][2][3][4] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is therefore recommended that 'at-risk' patients receiving procedures that could induce bacteremias should receive prophylactic treatment [1][2][3][4] . The American Heart Association (AHA) and the British Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC) provide guidelines regarding prophylactic antibiotic prescription for dental surgical procedures such as tooth extraction, periodontal surgery, dental implant replacement and endodontic surgery 1,2 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the guidelines for prophylactic treatment in oral and maxillofacial surgery should contribute to the prevention of infective endocarditis, scientific data is not available and consequently the prophylaxis for the surgery is empirically performed 1 . Data concerning the incidence and nature of bacteremia resulting from individual surgical procedures would be important in assessing the need for prophylaxis and choice of antimicrobial regimen 4 . However, to date, there have been few studies investigating bacteremias related to oral and maxillofacial surgery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Incidence and bacteriology of bacteremia associated with various oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures

Takai

Kuriyama

Yanagisawa

et al. 2005

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, an

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and bacteriology of bacteremia associated with various oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures. Methods.A total of 237 patients who underwent oral and maxillofacial surgery were included in this study. Blood samples were obtained for bacteriological examination immediately after the essential steps of the surgical procedure had been performed.Results. Bacteremia was detected in patients who underwent surgery for tumor, infection and trauma, and surgical reconstruction of jaw. In particular, decortication for osteomyelitis and tooth extraction resulted in a higher incidence of bacteremia compared with other surgical procedures. The incidence of bacteremia was not affected by oral hygiene, gingival inflammation, blood loss and duration of surgery. Furthermore, concerning tooth extraction, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of bacteremia with respect to the number of teeth extracted and the method of extraction.Extraction of teeth with odontogenic infection (periodontitis, periapical infection and pericoronitis) did however produce a significantly increased incidence of bacteremia compared with infection-free teeth (P<0.01).Viridans streptococci were the predominant group of bacteria isolated from the bacteremias. Conclusion.Oral and maxillofacial surgery involving trans-oral incision produces bacteremia, regardless of the extent and degree of surgical invasion. In particular, surgical procedure at infected sites is more likely to result in bacteremia compared with infection-free sites.

show abstract

“…This would support the belief that surgical procedure at infected sites is more likely to produce bacteremia 4 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Incidence and bacteriology of bacteremia associated with various oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures

Takai

Kuriyama

Yanagisawa

et al. 2005

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, an

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…38 Obviously, MBI is itself a risk factor for viridans streptococcal bacteraemia but it might not always indicate systemic infection since transient bacteraemia also occurs in healthy persons after dental manipulation. 41 Moreover, these bacteria do not elaborate exotoxins nor are they professional pathogens. Thus, viridans streptococcal bacteraemia might simply signal the presence of mucosal barrier injury rather than infection.…”

Section: The Epithelial Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

Mucosal barrier injury: biology, pathology, clinical counterparts and consequences of intensive treatment for haematological malignancy: an overview

Blijlevens¹,

Donnelly²,

Pauw³

2000

Bone Marrow Transplant

236

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:Mucositis is an inevitable side-effect of the conditioning regimens used for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The condition is better referred to as mucosal barrier injury (MBI) since it is primarily the result of toxicity and is a complex and dynamic pathobiological process manifested not only in the mouth but also throughout the entire digestive tract. A model has been proposed for oral MBI and consists of four phases, namely inflammatory, epithelial, ulcerative and healing phases. A variety of factors are involved in causing and modulating MBI including the nature of the conditioning regimen, the elaboration of pro-inflammatory and other cytokines, translocation of the resident microflora and their products, for example, endotoxins across the mucosal barrier, exposure to antimicrobial agents and whether or not the haematopoietic stem cell graft is from a donor. Neutropenic typhlitis is the most severe gastrointestinal manifestation of MBI, but it also influences the occurrence of other major transplant-related complications including acute GVHD, veno-occlusive disease and systemic infections. The pathobiology, clinical counterparts and the means of measuring MBI are discussed together with potential approaches for prevention, amelioration and, perhaps, even cure. Bone Marrow Transplantation (2000) 25, 1269-1278. Keywords: mucositis; mucosal barrier injury; diagnosis; risk factors; treatment Mucositis is an inevitable side-effect of the intensive conditioning therapy used for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation 1 and usually refers to the mucosal ulceration of mouth and throat. However, it is generally accepted that oral mucositis is in reality the most obvious manifestation of damage or injury elsewhere particularly that of the gut. Hence, mucosal barrier injury (MBI) may be a more appropriate term for this biological process. There exists no clear definition of MBI which is defined by a constellation of signs and symptoms that vary in their clinical expression. Oral MBI is reported to affect 60% to 100% of transplant recipients 2,3 and is characterised by pain, oedema, erythema, lesions, pseudomembrane formation, excessive mucous production, reduced saliva and bleeding, all of which reduce the patient's ability to eat and drink. In contrast, there are no reliable data on the incidence of gut MBI although intestinal symptoms affect almost every transplant recipient to some extent and include nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramping and watery diarrhoea occasionally accompanied by macroscopic blood loss. The exact course and severity of bowel symptoms of MBI are also difficult to ascertain because many patients are in such pain due to oral MBI that they only gain relief from narcotic analgesia which induces constipation as a result of reduced gut motility. There are also a number of scoring systems for oral MBI 4 although none is universally accepted and all lack standardisation. As yet, there is no system for registering gut MBI although there are published definitions for grading toxicity o...

show abstract

Prophylaxis of Endocarditis

Vinh

Embil

2006

Endocarditis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacteremia After Oral Surgery and Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Endocarditis

Cited by 58 publications

References 66 publications

Incidence and bacteriology of bacteremia associated with various oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures

Incidence and bacteriology of bacteremia associated with various oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures

Mucosal barrier injury: biology, pathology, clinical counterparts and consequences of intensive treatment for haematological malignancy: an overview

Prophylaxis of Endocarditis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About