2020
DOI: 10.1007/s10006-020-00835-w
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Treatment of odontogenic abscesses: comparison of primary and secondary removal of the odontogenic focus and antibiotic therapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, our results raise the question of when a tooth extraction alone is insufficient as treatment for OI or if infection spread is not identified at a sufficiently early stage. On the other hand, even though prompt OI care is known to require simultaneous tooth extraction [23,37], it is often not made in time [21]. In addition, the extraction itself may in some cases predispose the patient to infection spread.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, our results raise the question of when a tooth extraction alone is insufficient as treatment for OI or if infection spread is not identified at a sufficiently early stage. On the other hand, even though prompt OI care is known to require simultaneous tooth extraction [23,37], it is often not made in time [21]. In addition, the extraction itself may in some cases predispose the patient to infection spread.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The identified RCTs could not be included in the systematic review either because the Narrative review on effectiveness of antibiotics in pericoronitis outcomes were not separately reported for endodontic and periodontal abscesses (or pericoronitis) [27][28][29][30][31], because the efficacy of two antibiotics was compared with each other in the absence of a placebo or control group [27,28,30,[32][33][34][35][36], or because no separate outcomes were provided for patients in whom antibiotics were used as a single treatment versus patients in whom antibiotics were used as adjunctive treatment (Table 5) [27,28]. Very recently, two retrospective cohort studies were published, but they were both restricted to hospitalised patients (while the focus of this systematic review was on patients treated in the ambulatory setting) and not limited to periodontal abscesses, but most importantly, there was no control group, so they could not provide an answer to our research question either (Table 6) [37,38]. Comparable concerns apply to the older studies published by Taani [39], Hafström et al [40], Sasaki [41], and Smith and Davies [42].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since their discovery, antibiotics have become essential in successfully combating infectious diseases to improve human health [1,2]. In dentistry, antibiotics are selectively used for orofacial infections of odontogenic and non-odontogenic origins such as dental abscess, pulpal necrosis, periodontal diseases, dental caries, dental trauma, adenoiditis, otomastoiditis, and in prophylaxis [2][3][4][5]. Penicillin beta-lactam and amoxicillin, along with clindamycin, are the most widely prescribed oral antibiotic agents in dentistry, prophylactically and for therapeutic use, for their broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity of the former and as an alternate to penicillin allergic responses for the latter [1,6,7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%