Azithromycin as prophylaxis for the prevention of postoperative infection in impacted mandibular third-molar surgery

Clinical and Biochemical Evaluation of the Use of Alb-PRF versus L-PRF in Mandibular Third Molar Extractions: A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

Bone tissue engineering seeks biomaterials that enable cell migration, angiogenesis, matrix deposition, and tissue regeneration. Blood concentrates like platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) offer a cost-effective source of cells and growth factors to enhance healing. The present study aimed to evaluate heated serum albumin with liquid PRF (Alb-PRF) and L-PRF clinically and biochemically after placement in dental sockets following mandibular third molar extraction. In a controlled, split-mouth study involving 10 volunteers, 20 extracted molars were treated with either Alb-PRF or L-PRF. Post-extraction, pain, trismus, infection presence, and swelling were measured. The concentrations of different analytes in the surgical sites were also examined. The data were statistically analyzed, with significance defined at p < 0.05 (t-test). No significant difference was noted between the groups for pain and trismus, but Alb-PRF showed a significant reduction in swelling on day seven. The Alb-PRF group showed lower levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines (GM-CSF, IL-1b, IL-6, IFNy, IL-8, IL-15, RANTES, and MIP-1a) after seven days, with only higher expressions of MIP-1b, IL-1b, and MCP-1 found in the L-PRF group. Differences were observed in the release of analytes between L-PRF and Alb-PRF, with Alb-PRF significantly reducing edema after seven days. Alb-PRF reduced edema, while L-PRF increased inflammatory cytokines. When compared to L-PRF, Alb-PRF reduced edema and the release of inflammatory cytokines, suggesting promising effects in socket healing while underscoring the role of growth factors and cytokines in potential applications of blood concentrates.

Comparative Clinical Study Between Chlorhexidine Gel (0.2%) and Hyaluronic Gel (1%) in the Prevention of a Dry Socket After Tooth Extraction for Orthodontic Treatment

Introduction Several articles have investigated the intra-alveolar applications of bioadhesive gels containing various medicines and active chemicals, such as chlorhexidine (CHX) and hyaluronic acid (HA) to minimize the numerous postoperative sequelae, such as a dry socket. The purpose of this study was to investigate the postoperative outcomes of intra-alveolar application of 0.2% chlorhexidine or hyaluronic acid following atraumatic extraction. Methods A randomized clinical trial was conducted on a sample of 36 patients who need extraction of lower first premolar for orthodontic treatment. The patients were assigned randomly into two groups: CHX group and HA group. The signs and symptoms of the dry socket were evaluated on the third day in two groups. Results There was no statistically significant difference between the study and control groups when comparing the CHX group (P=0.2.6). In contrast, a significant difference was seen between the study and control sides in the HA group. Conclusions Within the limitation of this clinical trial, using hyaluronic gel with a gelatin sponge may be a preventive strategy for a dry socket following tooth extraction. After non-surgical tooth extraction, the topical administration of CHX with a gelatin sponge as a carrier did not seem to act as a protective substance against a dry socket.

Comparison of the efficacy of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid with metronidazole to azithromycin with metronidazole after surgical removal of impacted lower third molar to prevent infection

Objectives

The goal of the study was to investigate the clinical effects of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (500+125 mg) with metronidazole 400 mg administered three times daily (Group I) versus azithromycin 500 mg administered once daily and with metronidazole 400 mg three times daily (Group II) for the prevention of postoperative infection following mandibular third molar surgical removal.

Materials and Methods

The study design was a single-center prospective study. Patients who reported to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery between February 2015 and January 2017 for removal of mandibular third molar were screened, and 108 patients were chosen. One surgeon carried out all procedures. Patients were prescribed antibiotics until the two groups contained a similar number of cases.

Results

Our data showed that Group II had fewer incidences of surgical site infection, but with no statistical significance.

Conclusion

Although both treatments are used routinely after removal of the mandibular third molar, neither is significantly better than the other.

Angiogenesis and the prevention of alveolar osteitis: a review study

Angiogenesis is one of the essential processes that occur during wound healing. It is responsible for providing immunity as well as the regenerative cells, nutrition, and oxygen needed for the healing of the alveolar socket following tooth extraction. The inappropriate removal of formed blood clots causes the undesirable phenomenon of alveolar osteitis (AO) or dry socket. In this review, we aimed to investigate whether enhanced angiogenesis contributes to a more effective prevention of AO. The potential pro- or anti-angiogenic activity of different materials used for the treatment of AO were evaluated. An electronic search was performed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases via OVID from January 2000 to September 2016 using the keywords mentioned in the PubMed and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms regarding the role of angiogenesis in the prevention of AO. Our initial search identified 408 articles using the keywords indicated above, with 38 of them meeting the inclusion criteria set for this review. Due to the undeniable role of angiogenesis in the socket healing process, it is beneficial if strategies for preventing AO are directed toward more proangiogenic materials and modalities.

The efficacy of intra-alveolar 0.2% chlorhexidine gel on alveolar osteitis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of 0.2% chlorhexidine gel in preventing alveolar osteitis following mandibular third molar extraction(s).

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Science Direct and the references of identified articles were searched for relevant studies that met our eligibility criteria. Treatment effects were combined by meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software.

RESULTS

We included 11 trials in this meta-analysis. Compared to the control, 0.2% chlorhexidine gel reduced the risk of alveolar osteitis by 62% (RR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.28-0.53, P < 0.00001) following mandibular third molar extraction(s). The subgroup analysis results indicated that 0.2% chlorhexidine gel reduced the risk of alveolar osteitis after mandibular third molar extraction(s) by 75% (RR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.11-0.58) and 56% (RR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.30-0.63) compared to no treatment and placebo, respectively. However, the occurrence of alveolar osteitis following mandibular third molar extraction(s) was not significantly different between 0.2% chlorhexidine gel and 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthwash (RR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.06-1.00).

CONCLUSION

The results showed that 0.2% chlorhexidine gel was effective in preventing alveolar osteitis after lower third molar extraction(s).

Do systemic antibiotics prevent dry socket and infection after third molar extraction? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The use of antibiotics to prevent dry socket and infection is a controversial but widespread practice. The aim of the study is to assess the efficacy of systemic antibiotics in reducing the frequencies of these complications after extraction.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis, according to the PRISMA statement, based on randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials evaluating systemic antibiotics to prevent dry socket and infection after third molar surgery. Databases were searched up to June 2015. Relative risks (RRs) were calculated with inverse variance-weighted, fixed-effect, or random-effect models.

RESULTS

We included 22 papers in the qualitative and 21 in the quantitative review (3304 extractions). Overall-RR was 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.56; P < .0001); number needed to treat, 14 (95% CI 11-19). Penicillins-RR: 0.40 (95% CI 0.27-0.59). Nitroimidazoles-RR: 0.56 (95% CI 0.38-0.82). No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic antibiotics significantly reduce the risk of dry socket and infection in third molar extraction.

Novel incision design and primary flap closure reduces the incidence of alveolar osteitis and infection in impacted mandibular third molar surgery

OBJECTIVE

To measure the influence of flap design on alveolar osteitis (AO) and postoperative complications following mandibular third molar surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

This study was designed as a randomized single-blind, split-mouth clinical trial. The predictor variable was flap type. Envelope flap, modified triangular flap (MTF), and two related experimental flaps (second molar mesial papilla-sparing marginal incision with distobuccal release with double-pass single-layered primary closure [MPMI-2 X] and single-pass single-layered primary closure [MPMI-1 X]) were used. The primary outcome variable was AO. The secondary outcome variables were wound dehiscence and infection. Bivariate and logistic analyses were computed. P value < .05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-six patients with symmetric bilateral partial bony or full bony impacted mandibular third molars participated. No sites (0 of 196) treated with MPMI-2 X developed AO, and only two sites (2 of 196) treated with MPMI-2 X developed postoperative infection. Both MPMI-1 X and MPMI-2 X were associated with decreased odds of complications compared with MTF and envelope flap. MPMI-2 X sites were significantly less likely than MTF sites to experience complications for both sides.

CONCLUSIONS

MPMI-2 X is a reliable technique to reduce complications, such as AO, wound dehiscence, and infection in mandibular third molar surgery.

Systemic review of dry socket: aetiology, treatment, and prevention

Our systemic review is to make a comprehensive review about the aetiology, treatment and the prevention of dry socket, the inclusion criteria were all the studies that discuss the dry socket and its etiology, treatment and prevention and exclusion criteria were all the studies that discuss the other complications of tooth extraction, the materials and methods used for this systemic review was to search in the Pub Medline database between 2008 to 2013, using specific words "dry socket, aetiology, treatment and prevention" and published in the English language, the articles were screened by abstract for relevance to aetiology, treatment and prevention of dry socket, 82 papers were identified in pub med but a total of 36 out of Publications were included in the final systemic review according to the specific keywords and materials mentioned above. The occurrence of dry socket in an everyday oral surgery or dental practice is unavoidable. The risk factors are smoking, surgical trauma, single extractions, age, sex, medical history, systemic disorder, extraction site, amount of anaesthesia, operator experience, antibiotics use prior to surgery, difficulty of the surgery and the previous surgical site infection in addition to oral Contraceptives, menstrual cycle and immediate postextraction socket irrigation with normal saline. The traditional options of treatment are directed toward palliative care, such as the irrigation of the surgical site, avoiding curetting the extraction socket, Packing with a zinc oxide- eugenol paste on iodoform gauze can be considered to relieve acute pain episodes, there is also new agents in the market can accelerate the healing of the socket such as PRGF and GECB. The prevention methods include avoiding smoking before and after surgery and a traumatic surgery, the use of antibiotics, such as, azithromycin, can be considered, the other preventive measures such as chlorhecidine rinse or gel can be effective in the reduction of dry socket incidence.

Efficacy of single dose azithromycin as prophylactic antibiotic in surgical removal of mandibular third molars: a clinical study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of single dose Azithromycin as prophylactic antibiotic in surgical removal of mandibular third molar.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was carried out as an open clinical trial on fifty (23 males & 27 females) patients chosen from the ones referred to our Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Department for surgical removal of mandibular third molar (SRMTM). Pre-surgical evaluation of pain, swelling, lymphadenopathy, fever and purulent discharge from the surgical site were made. All patients were administered oral Azithromycin 500mg, 1 hour prior to the procedure. The patients were followed up clinically for a minimum period of 10 days post operatively. Evaluation for pyrexia, purulent discharge from surgical site, persistent pain &/or swelling & lymphadenopathy was done on 1st, 3rd, 7th and 10th postoperative day to determine SSI (surgical site infection). All patients received same set of post-operative medications (Tab. Diclofenac sodium (50mg) TID, Tab. Ranitidine 150 mg BID for 5 days) and set of instructions.

RESULTS

Surgical site infection was seen in only one patient (2%) out of the total fifty patients included in the study when oral Azithromycin was administered one hour prior to surgical removal of mandibular third molar.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that, giving antibiotics pre-operatively 1 hour before the SRMTM is beneficial to reduce/avoid SSI. The surgeon must consider all potential factors that may contribute to the post-operative complication and decide whether the benefits of antibiotic therapy outweigh its risks.

Patients' perception of recovery after third molar surgery following postoperative treatment with moxifloxacin versus amoxicillin and clavulanic acid: a randomized, double-blind, controlled study

PURPOSE

To analyze the impact of the postoperative administration of moxifloxacin (MXF) on oral function and quality of life after third molar (TM) surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was designed. The study population consisted of 100 patients who underwent impacted TM extractions. Patients were distributed into 2 groups of 50 individuals each. Postoperatively, one group was administered MXF (400 mg/24 hours for 5 days); the positive control group received amoxicillin and clavulanic acid (AMX-CLV) (500/125 mg/8 hours for 5 days). Follow-up was performed for 7 postoperative days, during which the patient recorded information on pain, the use of rescue analgesia, undesirable effects of the medication, difficulty in speaking, difficulty in chewing, diet consistency, difficulty performing oral hygiene, asthenia, time in bed, going out of the house, and returning to work.

RESULTS

The administration of MFX was significantly associated with headache, and AMX-CLV was significantly associated with diarrhea. Greater difficulty in chewing and performing oral hygiene was observed in the AMX-CLV group compared with the MXF group. The percentage of patients who tolerated a diet of normal consistency was significantly higher in the MXF group compared with the AMX-CLV group. During the first 4 days of follow-up, the percentage of patients who returned to work was significantly higher in the MXF group than in the AMX-CLV group.

CONCLUSIONS

Moxifloxacin shortens the period of postoperative recovery in terms of oral function and return to work. Therefore, MXF could be a useful option in TM surgery when antibiotics are indicated, particularly if patients are allergic to beta-lactams, their oral flora is resistant to macrolides, or they are intolerant of either of these antibiotics.

Treatment of delayed-onset infections after impacted lower third molar extraction

PURPOSE

To describe the treatment of delayed-onset infections after lower third molar removal.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was made of 33 delayed-onset infections after impacted lower third molar extraction diagnosed between 2001 and 2005 in the Oral Surgery and Implantology Department of the School of Dentistry of the University of Barcelona, Spain.

RESULTS

Antibiotic treatment was effective in 22 patients, whereas the remaining 11 needed an additional surgical procedure to resolve this postoperative complication. Patients with prolonged use of antibiotics after the onset of the infection were more likely to require surgical intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with delayed-onset infections should be treated initially with antibiotics for 7 days. If the infection does not respond favorably within that time, surgical debridement of the extraction site should be done.