Do Penicillin-Allergic Patients Present a Higher Rate of Implant Failure?

Salomó-Coll, Oscar; Lozano-Carrascal, Naroa; Lázaro-Abdulkarim, Aida; Hernández–Alfaro, Federico; Gargallo‐Albiol, Jordi; Satorres-Nieto, Marta

doi:10.11607/jomi.7018

Cited by 26 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the last published evidence recommends a single preoperative dose of 1 g, 2 g or 3 g of amoxicillin [2, 7]. It has also been described recently that penicillin-allergic patients treated with clindamycin may present more risk of suffering oral implant failures [24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibiotic prophylaxis prescribing habits in oral implant surgery in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional survey

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThere seems to be no consensus on the prescription of prophylactic antibiotics in oral implant surgery. The Dutch Association of Oral Implantology (NVOI) guidelines do not include a clear policy on prophylactic antibiotic prescriptions for oral implant surgery among healthy patients. The purpose of the study was to determine whether antibiotic prophylaxis is commonly prescribed in the Netherlands by general dentists, maxillofacial surgeons and oral implantologists in conjunction with oral implant surgery among healthy patients and to assess the type and amount of prophylactic antibiotic prescribed.MethodsThis observational cross-sectional study is based on a web survey. A questionnaire developed in the United States of America was translated and slightly adjusted for use in the Netherlands. It contained predominantly close-ended questions relating to demographics, qualifications, antibiotic type, prescription duration and dosage. An email including an introduction to the study and an individual link to the questionnaire was sent in February 2018 to a sample of 600 general dental practitioners and all 302 specialized dentists (oral implantologists, periodontists and maxillofacial surgeons) recognized by the NVOI. Overall, 902 questionnaires were anonymously sent. Finally, 874 potential participants were reached. Collected data were analyzed through descriptive statistics.ResultsIn total, 218 (24.9%) participants responded to the questionnaire, including 45 females (20.8%) and 171 males (79.2%). Overall, 151 (69.9%) regularly placed oral implants. Of them, 79 (52.7%) prescribe antibiotics only in specific situations, 66 (43.7%) regularly, and 5 (3.3%) did not prescribe antibiotics at all. Overall, 83 participants who prescribe antibiotics did so both pre- and postoperatively (57.2%), 47 only preoperatively (32.4%) and 12 exclusively postoperatively (8.3%). A single dose of 2000 mg of amoxicillin orally one hour prior to surgery was the most prescribed preoperative regimen. The most frequently prescribed postoperative regimen was 500 mg of amoxicillin three times daily for five days after surgery. On average, participants prescribe a total of 7018 mg of antibiotics before, during or after oral implant surgery.ConclusionsAntibiotic prophylaxis in conjunction with oral implant surgery is prescribed in the Netherlands on a large scale, and recommendations based on the last published evidence are frequently not followed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibiotic prophylaxis prescribing habits in oral implant surgery in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional survey

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PCN-allergic patients demonstrated a higher risk of implant failure. 27 To evaluate these questions, a retrospective chart review was performed in 1 office. All patients who had an implant removed for any reason between 2007 and 2020 were included.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Factors Are Associated With Implant Failure?

Block¹,

Christensen

Mercante

et al. 2021

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This proportion is slightly higher than in our study, where 12.9% of the patients were seen to be allergic to penicillin. The majority of implant failures reported that the Salomo et al study 43 (78.95%) corresponded to early implant failures (lack of osseointegration). Alternately, peri‐implantitis revealed to be the main reason of IR in our series, corresponding to late implant failures, showing differences in the population recruited on both studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Overall, those mentioned studies were focused on peri‐implantitis, but instead, our results were focused on IR. In turn, Salomó et al 43 . reported that patients allergic to penicillin had a higher risk of implant failure, with a risk ratio of 3.84 compared with non‐allergic patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical sequelae and patients’ perception of dental implant removal: A cross‐sectional study

Gargallo‐Albiol

Tavelli

Barootchi

et al. 2020

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A cross‐sectional study was designed to shed light on the clinical sequelae and patient satisfaction after dental implant removal (IR). Methods Patients undergoing ≥1 IRs were eligible. The reasons for implant failure, clinical and radiological parameters before and after IR, and the surgical and prosthetic treatments offered after IR was assessed. Patient satisfaction was recorded and the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)‐14 was used to document patient self‐reported dysfunction and discomfort attributed to IR. Lastly, patient expectations after IR were also evaluated. Results Thirty‐one patients with 45 implants were analyzed. Peri‐implantitis was the main reason for IR (64.5%). The average implant survival time before IR was 120.3 ± 88.2 months. Signs of infection (51.7%) and bleeding on probing (37.5%) were common signs detected at the time of IR. Guided bone regeneration was the intervention most commonly applied simultaneously to IR (74.1%). The reported degree of satisfaction was high, and the overall OHIP‐14 score was low. However, a certain patient reluctance to undergo future implant placement in the same clinic or with the same professional was recorded, and a statistically significant increase in adherence to the implant maintenance routine was observed after IR. Conclusions Peri‐implantitis is the leading cause for IR. Guided bone regeneration is commonly applied to attenuate the clinical sequelae of IR. Nonetheless, IR does not seem to affect patients’ satisfaction nor their quality of life, though a certain patient reluctance to undergo future implant placement in the same clinic or with the same professional was reported.

show abstract

Do Penicillin-Allergic Patients Present a Higher Rate of Implant Failure?

Cited by 26 publications

References 3 publications

Antibiotic prophylaxis prescribing habits in oral implant surgery in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional survey

Antibiotic prophylaxis prescribing habits in oral implant surgery in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional survey

What Factors Are Associated With Implant Failure?

Clinical sequelae and patients’ perception of dental implant removal: A cross‐sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About