Are systemic antibiotics necessary in the prevention of wound healing complications after intra-alveolar dental extraction?

Prevalence and Factors Influencing Post-Operative Complications following Tooth Extraction: A Narrative Review

Background

Complications from dental extractions may result in multiple post-operative visits and adversely affect the patient's life. Preventing complications may decrease post-operative morbidity for the individual as well as lower societal costs, such as lost time from work and healthcare costs.

Objectives

This narrative review aims to assess the prevalence and factors influencing post-operative complications following tooth extraction, helping clinicians minimise the risk. Data Sources. Cross-sectional studies. Study Eligibility and Participants. Patients undergoing dental extractions. Our exclusion criteria included in vitro studies, animal studies, terminally ill patients, and tooth loss not due to dental extraction. Literature was collected from "PubMed" and "Web of Science" through search criteria based on the "PICO" framework. Twenty articles were used to formulate a prevalence table, and 156 articles were included for the factors influencing complications. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods. This narrative review was reported using the SANRA (a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles) checklist. Due to the scope of our narrative review and its associated objectives, the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS) will be conducted from the studies outlining the prevalence.

Results

Alveolar osteitis appears to be the most prevalent post-operative complication following tooth extraction. Predisposing factors can be significant in their ability to alter the risk of postoperative complications, and clinicians should provide patient-centred care to mitigate this risk. Limitations. Due to the breadth of context, a systematic review was not feasible, as it may have introduced heterogeneity.

Conclusion

This narrative review has highlighted an array of factors which can influence the prevalence of post-operative complications. Future research would benefit from individually reporting post-operative complications, reducing the heterogeneity in definitions of the complications, and including greater detail on the predisposing factors studied.

A Systematic Review on the Role of Antibiotics and Analgesics in Systemically Ill Patients Undergoing Tooth Extraction

Antibiotics are commonly prescribed as a preventive measure, particularly post-tooth extraction, aiming to minimize the risk of infection. Preemptive analgesia functions by disrupting the nervous system's ability to encode pain stimuli, thus preventing the formation of pain memory. Dentists often recommend analgesics and antibiotics either as adjuncts or sole treatments for various dental conditions, offering both efficacy and cost-effectiveness. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Science Direct, and Lilac, using MeSH terms relevant to the role of antibiotics and analgesics in systemically ill patients undergoing tooth extraction. Out of 178 articles screened, 83 underwent full-text assessment for eligibility, and six were selected for qualitative analysis. The review process adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, ensuring methodological rigor and transparent reporting. Across diverse study populations, the role of antibiotics and analgesics consistently demonstrated a statistically significant impact. Hence, the utilization of analgesics and antibiotics plays a pivotal role in preventing infection following tooth extraction in systemically ill patients, thereby promoting optimal oral hygiene and overall health.

Is Antibiotic Prophylaxis Needed for the Extraction of Premolars for Orthodontic Purposes?

Introduction Antibiotic prophylaxis for tooth extractions is a common practice in dentistry to prevent postoperative infections. However, the routine use of antibiotics has been questioned due to concerns about bacterial resistance and potential side effects. This study aimed to evaluate the necessity of postoperative antibiotics in patients undergoing orthodontic tooth extraction. Materials and methods This prospective study involved 100 patients requiring orthodontic tooth extraction, divided into two groups. The patients were recruited from Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India, after obtaining approval from the Institutional Human Ethics Committee, Saveetha Dental College (approval number: IHEC/SDC/OMFS-2103/23/293). Group 1 (n = 50) received antibiotics (amoxicillin 500 mg, three times a day for three days) after extraction, while Group 2 (n = 50) did not receive antibiotics. Postoperative infection was assessed on postoperative days (POD) 3 and 7. Data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26.0 (released 2019, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentages, and differences between groups were assessed using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results The incidence of postoperative infection was recorded in both groups. In group 1 at POD 3 and POD 7, there were two patients and one patient with infection, respectively. In group 2 at POD 3 and POD 7, there were four patients and two patients with infection, respectively. Conclusion The findings of this study suggest that the routine administration of antibiotics for the non-traumatic extraction of teeth in healthy patients might not be necessary. The absence of postoperative infections in patients who did not receive antibiotics indicates that antibiotics may be avoidable in many cases of orthodontic tooth extraction. These results emphasize the importance of reconsidering the widespread use of antibiotics to combat the growing concern of bacterial resistance. Antibiotics should be prescribed judiciously, only for patients with specific medical conditions who are prone to infection. One of the limitations of this study is the limited sample size; hence, studies with larger and heterogeneous groups should be done to validate the same.

Risk factors for oral infection and dry socket post-tooth extraction in medically complex patients in the absence of antibiotic prophylaxis: A case-control study

INTRODUCTION

Dry socket and infection are complications of tooth extractions. The objective was to determine risk factors for post-extraction complications in patients without antibiotic prophylaxis stratified by early- and late-complications and complication type (oral infection and dry socket).

METHODS

Retrospective, case (with complications)-control (without complications) study of patients (n = 708) who had ≥1 extraction performed at any Veterans Health Administration facility between 2015-2019 and were not prescribed an antibiotic 30 days pre-extraction.

RESULTS

Early complication cases (n = 109) were more likely to be female [odds ratio (OR) = 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI):1.05-4.01], younger (OR = 0.29; 95% CI:0.09-0.94 patients ≥ 80 years old, reference:18-44 years), Native American/Alaska Native (OR = 21.11; 95% CI:2.33-191.41) and have fewer teeth extracted (OR = 0.53 3+ teeth extracted; 95% CI:0.31-0.88, reference:1 tooth extracted). Late complication cases (n = 67) were more likely to have a bipolar diagnosis (OR = 2.98; 95% CI:1.04-8.57), history of implant placement (OR = 8.27; 95% CI:1.63-41.82), and history of past smoking (OR = 2.23; 95% CI:1.28-3.88).

CONCLUSION

Predictors for post-extraction complications among patients who did not receive antibiotic prophylaxis were similar to prior work in cohorts who received prophylaxis. Unique factors identified in a medically complex population included being younger, Native American/Alaska Native, having mental health conditions, history of a dental implant, and fewer teeth extracted.

Use or abuse of antibiotics as prophylactic therapy in oral surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUD

Antibiotics are a type of medication routinely prescribed by dental professionals; however, it is very common that the administration is not justified. Around 15% of dentists admit that they have administered antibiotics unnecessarily more than once a week. The objective of this project is to identify the effectiveness of the use of antibiotics as prophylactic therapy in oral surgery, and to carry out an analysis of the alternatives to pharmacological therapy.

METHODS

The search strategy was carried out in the PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect databases. For study selection, a first filter was carried out by title and abstract, which mentioned the use of prophylactic antibiotics in some type of oral surgery. To establish the risk of bias, the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials was utilized.

RESULTS

The type of antibiotics most prescribed as prophylactic therapy were beta-lactams, which were indicated in 100% of the studies. Penicillins predominated, observing amoxicillin as the most indicated drug in 54.1% of the studies (n = 13) followed by the use of amoxicillin in conjunction with clavulanic acid in 33.3% of the studies (n = 8). Of the 21 studies included, 17 mention that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of antibiotics as prophylactic therapy in patients who will undergo some type of oral surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Without a doubt, the biggest challenge is to develop academic update strategies aimed at dentists with active clinical practice and dental students from educational and government institutions to provide updated information about the correct use of prescription drugs.

Radiographic Examination before Dental Extraction from Dentists' Perspective

Background

It is generally agreed that radiographic examination is important before dental extraction. It provides information about the roots and the surrounding tissues. In terms of practice, it does not seem to be a universally implemented protocol regarding the use of dental radiology before dental extraction. Besides, the type of radiographic technique is not specified. Some references prefer periapical dental radiographs. Others prefer orthopantomography), or even cone beam computed tomography Delpachitra et al. (2021) [1]. In terms of the dental practice, it is not clear whether there is a universally adopted protocol regarding the use of dental radiographs before dental extraction. Aim of the study. To assess dental professionals' perspective toward radiographic examination before conventional dental extraction.

Materials and Methods

A Google form questionnaire was circulated to different dental professionals using mainly ResearchGate, in addition to different social media platforms.

Results

One hundred and forty-five dentists participated in the questionnaire. The respondents were divided according to the country of current practice: national (Iraqi), regional (Middle Eastern), and international participants. Out of 144 respondents, 51.4% percent of the participants were international, while 40.3% were Iraqis, and 8.3% were from the Middle East. The need for dental radiography in all dental extraction procedures was reported in the majority of responses (n = 86). Only 11 dentists think there is no necessity for radiographic examination before conventional extraction. The chi-square test showed a highly significant relationship between the country of current practice and the need for X-ray examination for conventional dental extraction (P < 0.01). Seventy-six dentists prefer periapical radiographs. Thirty-five preferred orthopantomography. A highly significant relationship was found between the country of practice and the X-ray technique (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

The study showed that there is no universally adopted protocol regarding the use of dental radiography before dental extraction. The country of practice appears to govern the dentists' decisions regarding the need for an X-ray and the type of radiography prior to dental extraction. Periapical radiographs for posterior teeth seem to be the preferable choice before dental extraction.

Aetiology, Prevention and Management of Alveolar Osteitis-A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (AO) is a poorly understood, common, painful complication following exodontia. It is sometimes managed by inappropriate prescription of antibiotics which contributes to the global threat of antimicrobial resistance. Use of intra-alveolar chlorhexidine also presents a serious risk of anaphylaxis to the patient.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to investigate the aetiology, prevention and management of AO and highlight the extent of inappropriate prescribing and intra-alveolar chlorhexidine use.

DESIGN

A scoping review was undertaken using the PRISMA guidelines. Medline, Ovid and Pubmed were searched between 2010 and 2020, from which 63 studies were selected for review that related to the aetiology, prevention or management of AO. Data were analysed for frequency of studies reporting information on risk factors for aetiology, prevention strategies and management including inappropriate management using antibiotic prescribing and intra-alveolar chlorhexidine.

RESULTS

Impaired immune response, surgical technique and age were identified as significant factors in the development of AO, while there is conflicting evidence regarding the effects of smoking and gender. With regard to prevention, the use of prophylactic antibiotics is not supported within the literature. Saline irrigation and eugenol pastes used preventively have been shown to be cheap and effective alternatives to chlorhexidine with no adverse effects. Hyaluronic acid and low-level laser therapies showed a significant reduction in pain and soft-tissue inflammation in the management of AO compared to Alveogyl.

CONCLUSIONS

Further understanding of the pathophysiology of AO is needed, in addition to large high-quality RCTs or long-term observational studies into the aetiology, prevention, and management of AO to produce up-to-date evidence-based clinical guidelines. Clinicians should also be mindful of their contribution to growing antimicrobial resistance and avoid inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics. Saline should replace chlorhexidine as the intra-alveolar irrigant of choice.

Antibiotics to prevent complications following tooth extractions

BACKGROUND

The most frequent indications for tooth extractions, generally performed by general dental practitioners, are dental caries and periodontal infections. Systemic antibiotics may be prescribed to patients undergoing extractions to prevent complications due to infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis on the prevention of infectious complications following tooth extractions.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register (to 16 April 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2020, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 April 2020), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 April 2020), and LILACS (1982 to 16 April 2020). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing tooth extraction(s) for any indication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently performed data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment for the included studies. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For continuous outcomes, we used mean differences (MD) with 95% CI using random-effects models. We examined potential sources of heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for key outcomes as high, moderate, low, or very low, using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 trials that randomised approximately 3206 participants (2583 analysed) to prophylactic antibiotics or placebo. Although general dentists perform dental extractions because of severe dental caries or periodontal infection, only one of the trials evaluated the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in groups of patients affected by those clinical conditions. We assessed 16 trials as being at high risk of bias, three at low risk, and four as unclear.  Compared to placebo, antibiotics may reduce the risk of postsurgical infectious complications in patients undergoing third molar extractions by approximately 66% (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64; 1728 participants; 12 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 19 people (95% CI 15 to 34) need to be treated with antibiotics to prevent one infection following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. Antibiotics may also reduce the risk of dry socket by 34% (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; 1882 participants; 13 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 46 people (95% CI 29 to 62) need to take antibiotics to prevent one case of dry socket following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. The evidence for our other outcomes is uncertain: pain, whether measured dichotomously as presence or absence (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.12; 675 participants; 3 studies) or continuously using a visual analogue scale (0-to-10-centimetre scale, where 0 is no pain) (MD -0.26, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.07; 422 participants; 4 studies); fever (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.79; 475 participants; 4 studies); and adverse effects, which were mild and transient (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.64; 1277 participants; 8 studies) (very low-certainty evidence).  We found no clear evidence that the timing of antibiotic administration (preoperative, postoperative, or both) was important. The included studies enrolled a subset of patients undergoing dental extractions, that is healthy people who had surgical extraction of third molars. Consequently, the results of this review may not be generalisable to all people undergoing tooth extractions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority (21 out of 23) of the trials included in this review included only healthy patients undergoing extraction of impacted third molars, often performed by oral surgeons. None of the studies evaluated tooth extraction in immunocompromised patients. We found low-certainty evidence that prophylactic antibiotics may reduce the risk of infection and dry socket following third molar extraction when compared to placebo, and very low-certainty evidence of no increase in the risk of adverse effects. On average, treating 19 healthy patients with prophylactic antibiotics may stop one person from getting an infection. It is unclear whether the evidence in this review is generalisable to patients with concomitant illnesses or patients at a higher risk of infection. Due to the increasing prevalence of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotic treatment, clinicians should evaluate if and when to prescribe prophylactic antibiotic therapy before a dental extraction for each patient on the basis of the patient's clinical conditions (healthy or affected by systemic pathology) and level of risk from infective complications. Immunocompromised patients, in particular, need an individualised approach in consultation with their treating medical specialist.

Non-impacted tooth extractions and antibiotic treatment: A RCT study

OBJECTIVES

A controlled, single-blind, randomized clinical trial was performed to evaluate usefulness of antibiotics in preventing pain and complications after tooth extractions and benefits of probiotics in reducing gastro-intestinal symptoms associated with antibiotic therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 159 patients were enrolled in this trial. After tooth extractions, patients were allocated to one of the groups: group 1 received postoperatively amoxicillin + clavulanic acid; group 2 received the same antibiotic therapy with an adjunctive probiotic treatment; and group 3 received neither antibiotics nor probiotics. Follow-up visits were planned at 7, 14, and 21 days after tooth extractions (T1, T2, and T3), and parameters assessed were pain, presence of abscess, edema, fever, alveolitis, trismus, pain, difficulty in daily routine activities, and gastro-intestinal symptoms.

RESULTS

The number of patients reporting pain at T1 was significantly higher in the control group when compared to group 2 (p = .016), while no difference for pain intensity was observed between groups. No surgical site infection was observed in any of the groups. Intestinal symptoms seemed to be tackled by probiotic administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain was the most important symptom in the control group. Antibiotics were not necessary after non-impacted tooth extractions, and probiotics can reduce gastro-intestinal symptoms associated with antibiotics.

Randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of absorbable collagen sponge after extraction of impacted mandibular third molar: split-mouth design

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of absorbable collagen sponge insertion in tooth extraction sites for socket healing of the impacted mandibular third molar.

Methods

Thirty-six patients with bilateral mandibular impacted third molars based on Pell-Gregory and Winter classification were included in this study. This study was a randomized clinical trial utilizing a split-mouth design with one side assigned as collagen sponge insertion and the other side assigned as the control. Post-operative clinical complications, periodontal integrities, and radiographic outcomes were assessed at 1, 2, and 14-weeks post operatively.

Results

Five patients were excluded during the follow-up period due to loss of follow-up. The study was conducted on 31 patients in total. The mean VAS score of collagen sponge insertion side at 1 week post operation was 1.42 ± 1.26, which was significantly lower than the control side (P < 0.05). The mean probing depth of collagen sponge insertion side at 2-week post operation was 5.55 ± 2.28 mm, which was significantly lower than the control side (7.13 ± 1.86; P < 0.05). Other various measurements including radiographic outcomes showed no significant group differences.

Conclusions

Placement of collagen sponge after extraction of mandibular impacted third molar reduced early stage post-operative complications and enhanced initial healing of soft tissues and periodontal defects.

Trial registration

This study was retrospectively registered at the WHO ICTRP platform and Clinical Research Information Service, KCT0003363. Registered 21 Sep 2018.

Factors Influencing the Onset of Intra- and Post- Operative Complications Following Tooth Exodontia: Retrospective Survey on 1701 Patients

Complications after tooth extraction may occur because of several factors correlated to the patient's medical history, surgical site or type of intervention. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate type and frequency of complications after exodontic surgery, its correlation with antibiotic administration and between patient's related systemic factors. From June 2015 until February 2016 1701 exodontic interventions, for a total of 2322 extracted teeth, were carried out at the Unit of Oral Surgery in Trieste. Descriptive statistic, and backward multiple logistic regressions were performed to identify the variables associated with the presence of post-operative alveolitis or any other post-operative complication. The presence of coagulopathy and smoking habit were related to high risk of post-operative alveolitis (OR = 5.51, p = 0.035 and OR = 2.5, p = 0.029, respectively). Tooth fracture was found to be correlated with higher probability of post-operative alveolitis (p = 0.001) and concomitant chemotherapy put at a higher risk post-operative complications, including alveolitis (OR = 29.5, p = 0.018). According to the present results, antibiotic consumption did not seem to reduce the incidence of post-operative infective complications (alveolitis). A careful analysis of medical history, the adequate surgical technique, and the correct instructions in post-surgical behavior, prevent the insurgence of intra and post-operative complications.

Evaluation of Drug Susceptibility of Microorganisms in Odontogenic Inflammations and Dental Surgery Procedures Performed on an Outpatient Basis

Bacterial infections are the most common cause of purulent soft tissue inflammations in the head and neck area. These bacteria are also responsible for the majority of inflammatory complications after third molar removal. The key to success of antibacterial treatment in both cases is the use of an appropriate antibacterial agent. The aim of the study was to evaluate the susceptibility profile of bacteria isolated from material collected from patients with intraoral odontogenic abscesses. The test material consisted of swabs taken from the odontogenic abscesses, after their incision and drainage. Another swab was collected from the lesion area, 10 days after the initial visit. Results were compared with an identical study conducted on a control group of healthy patients, who had undergone third molar removal. Bacteria identified in this study consisted of aerobic and anaerobic strains, both Gram-positive and Gram-negative. According to the EUCAST guidelines, none of the tested antibiotics was recommended for all identified bacteria. The percentage of bacterial strains sensitive to amoxicillin and clavulanic acid was 78.13% and 81.48% in the study and control groups, respectively, whereas, the percentage of those sensitive to clindamycin was 96.43% and 80.00%, respectively. For Gram-negative aerobic bacteria, gentamicin and ciprofloxacin were among medications affecting all cultured species. 100.00% of strains were found to be susceptible to these antibiotics. Statistically significant relationship between the presence of Gram-negative aerobic strains and the occurrence of complications was found. In the case of the most frequently occurring bacteria in the study, amoxicillin with clavulanic acid and clindamycin were shown to be very effective. In cases of severe purulent odontogenic inflammations, it is recommended to use a combination of antibiotics. Amoxicillin with ciprofloxacin and clindamycin with cefuroxime seem to be the proper choices based on the results of this study.

Guaiacol/β-cyclodextrin for rapid healing of dry socket: antibacterial activity, cytotoxicity, and bone repair-an animal study

PURPOSE

Dry socket (DS) is one the most common and symptomatic post-extraction complications; however, no consensus on its treatment has been reached. This study aimed to develop a novel dressing material for DS containing the phenolic agent guaiacol and evaluate its biological properties.

METHODS

An inclusion complex of guaiacol and β-cyclodextrin (Gu/βcd) was prepared by freeze-drying. Its antibacterial activity over six oral bacteria was analyzed using the microdilution method, and its cytotoxicity in osteoblasts was assessed with the MTT assay. The alveolar healing process induced by Gu/βcd was evaluated histologically after the treatment of DS in rats.

RESULTS

βcd complexation potentiated Gu's antibacterial effect and reduced its cytotoxicity in osteoblasts. Bone trabeculae were formed in the alveolar apices of rats treated with Gu/βcd by day 7. On day 14, woven bone occupied the apical and middle thirds of the sockets; on day 21, the entire alveolus was filled by newly formed bone, which was in a more advanced stage of repair than the positive control (Alvogyl™).

CONCLUSION

The improvement in Gu's biological properties in vitro and the rapid alveolar repair in comparison with Alvogyl™ in vivo demonstrated the benefits of the Gu/βcd complex as a future alternative for the treatment of DS.