Prophylactic antibiotics in intra-oral bone grafting procedures: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial

Lee, Jungwoo; Lee, Jin‐Yong; Kim, Soung Min; Kim, Myung-Jin; Lee, Jong-Ho

doi:10.5125/jkaoms.2012.38.2.90

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Factors such as filling large bone defects with bone block, mixed grafts (autogenous + synthetic) and diabetes mellitus may also be associated with infections 38 . To reduce potential out-of-office complications with bone grafting, it can be helpful to apply antibiotic therapy used sparingly 39 and intensification of care with oral hygiene habits 34 . Although there is still little dental use of bone grafts in Sobral, their cost-effectiveness and biosafety are generally satisfactory and in accordance with the literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brazilian dentists’ perceptions of using bone grafts: an inland survey

Araújo¹,

Antunes²,

Melo³

et al. 2020

Acta Odontol Latinoam

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pre-clinical assessments of bone substitute materials are frequent in the literature, but research papers about the clinical situation of bone graft use and consumer market acceptance are rare. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dental use of bone grafts according to the perception of dentists in the city of Sobral, Brazil. We interviewed 183 professionals and analyzed their professional data, knowledge of the subject, specific use, and opinions on cost-effectiveness and biosafety. Most of the respondents had 10 years’ or less experience in the profession, and lacked specialization though they had been familiar with the subject since they graduated. The most frequently mentioned compositions were ceramics, followed by composites. Only a quarter of the respondents had performed bone grafts, generally with up to 50 cases, with the most frequent applications being using simultaneously with a dental implant, fresh dental sockets and maxillary sinus lifting. Autogenous and xenogeneic grafts were more frequent than alloplastic and allogeneic; ceramics were the most frequently used composition, and the association of bone graft with membrane was more frequent than bone graft alone or associated with autologous fibrin. Professional and patient satisfaction was high, cost was considered moderate, and differences were found regarding patient participation in the choice and country of origin of the product. Bone grafts were used more often in the private than public service. Dentists stated that they follow the instructions. Inflammatory or infectious complications were found to be related to the frequency of the procedure performed and safety regarding the origin. Opinions were favorable regarding the use of grafts derived from animals and unfavorable to grafts derived from cadavers. Very few respondents were registered in human bone tissue banks. The good level of acceptance for dental use of bone grafts in a Brazilian inland city provides a promising scenario for the development of the sector.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brazilian dentists’ perceptions of using bone grafts: an inland survey

Araújo¹,

Antunes²,

Melo³

et al. 2020

Acta Odontol Latinoam

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The quality assessment resulted in two studies with a moderate risk of bias, Figure 3 [52,53], and two studies with a high risk of bias [54,55]. The main reason for the two studies being regarded as having a high risk of bias was shortcomings and uncertainties in the randomisation process.…”

Section: Primary Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only two primary studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were considered to be of moderate risk of bias [52,53]. The other eligible primary studies (n ¼ 2) were rejected due to a high risk of bias [54,55]. The main reasons for exclusion due to a high risk of bias were an unclear randomisation process and allocation concealment, insufficiently described blinding, and unclear outcome measures.…”

Section: References Reason For Exclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prophylactic antibiotics for staged bone augmentation in implant dentistry

Klinge

Khalil

Klinge

et al. 2019

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The objective of the study was to assess the effect of prophylactic antibiotics on the outcome of bone augmentation and subsequent dental implant placement by combining the recommended quality assessment methods for systematic reviews and primary studies. Materials and methods: This is a complex systematic review in which systematic reviews as well as primary studies are scrutinised. A search of Medline (OVID), The Cochrane Library (Wiley) and EMBASE, PubMed and Health technology assessment (HTA) organisations as-well as a complementary handsearch was carried out. Selected primary studies were assessed using GRADE. Each study was reviewed by three authors independently. Results: Abstract screening yielded six potential systematic reviews allocated for full-text inspection. A total of ten primary studies were read in full-text. No relevant systematic reviews regarding the topic of this article were found. The quality assessment resulted in two primary studies with a moderate risk of bias. Of the two studies with a moderate risk of bias, one compared a single dose of clindamycin 600 mg preoperatively with the same preoperative dose followed by four doses of 300 mg every 6 h. The second study compared a single dose prophylaxis of two different types of antibiotic compounds. Conclusion:In conclusion, the scientific evidence regarding the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing the risk of infection in conjunction with bone augmentation procedures during dental implant placement is very limited. The infection rate as compared to nonusage of prophylactic antibiotics, selection of the most suitable compound, and the optimal duration of prophylactic treatment is still unknown.

show abstract

“…Dentists are often faced with the dilemma of whether or not to prescribe antibiotics preventively in dental implant treatments, and this is currently a controversial issue. The prescription has been accepted not only to avoid systemic bacteremia [10] but also to achieve an adequate antibiotic concentration in the blood in order to prevent bacterial contamination during the surgical placement of implants or grafted material [11]. Amoxicillin is the most studied antibiotic for this purpose; however, antibiotics other than beta-lactams in penicillin-allergic patients are not sufficiently studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Penicillin Allergy a Risk Factor for Early Dental Implant Failure? A Systematic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prescription of preventive antibiotics in dental implant treatments reduces the incidence of early failures. This study has focused mainly on the influence of amoxicillin, which is contraindicated in penicillin-allergic patients. The present systematic review aimed to determine whether penicillin-allergic patients have a higher risk of implant failure compared to non-allergic patients. An electronic search was performed on Medline and Web of Science using the following MeSH terms: (penicillin allergy OR clindamycin OR erythromycin OR azithromycin OR metronidazole) AND (dental implant OR dental implant failure OR dental implant complications). The criteria employed were those described in the PRISMA® Declaration. Only five articles were included that analyzed the failure rates of implants placed in penicillin-allergic patients who were prescribed clindamycin compared to non-allergic patients who were prescribed amoxicillin. With the limitations of this study, it is not possible to state that penicillin allergy per se constitutes a risk factor for early dental implant failure as most of the studies included self-reported allergic patients. Clindamycin has been associated with a significantly elevated risk of failure and an up to six times increased risk of infection. Immediate implants also have a 5.7 to 10 times higher risk of failure.

show abstract

Prophylactic antibiotics in intra-oral bone grafting procedures: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial

Cited by 13 publications

References 10 publications

Brazilian dentists’ perceptions of using bone grafts: an inland survey

Brazilian dentists’ perceptions of using bone grafts: an inland survey

Prophylactic antibiotics for staged bone augmentation in implant dentistry

Is Penicillin Allergy a Risk Factor for Early Dental Implant Failure? A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About