Antibiotics in Dentoalveolar Surgery, a Closer Look at Infection, Alveolar Osteitis and Adverse Drug Reaction

Reduction of MRONJ risk after exodontia by virtue of ozone infiltration: A randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Exodontia is commonly considered as a risk factor for the development of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in individuals exposed to bone modifying agents. This study was aimed at assessing the efficiency and safety of a gaseous oxygen-ozone mixture as an adjuvant to a standard exodontia to reduce the risk of MRONJ development.

METHODS

A randomized, open-label, phase II, single-center clinical trial involving 117 patients at risk of MRONJ was conducted. The study protocol tested injections of an oxygen-ozone mixture in the post-extraction site. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: oxygen-ozone therapy, and standard tooth extraction protocol. Post-extraction wound healing was assessed using the Inflammatory Proliferative Remodeling (IPR) Wound Healing Scale.

RESULTS

The oxygen-ozone therapy group exhibited a significant improvement in wound healing post-extraction during the inflammatory and proliferative phases, as indicated by the IPR scale scores at 3-5 days (p = 0.006) and 14 days (p < 0.001) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Oxygen-ozone therapy shows promise in improving post-extraction healing in patients at risk of MRONJ. Future studies with larger sample sizes and multicenter collaborations are recommended to confirm the validity of these findings and explore the long-term efficacy of ozone therapy.

Indications for Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Dentoalveolar Procedures

Antibiotic prophylaxis is the use of antibiotics perioperatively to prevent infections at the surgical site or distant locations. The decision to provide prophylaxis must balance risks of antibiotic resistance, adverse drug reactions, and increased health care costs with the benefit of decreasing infection. This determination has been studied extensively in patients with specific cardiac conditions and prosthetic joints. Prophylactic antibiotics in healthy patients have been shown to reduce the frequency of alveolar osteitis and decrease the failure rates of dental implants.

Comparison of Different Antibiotic Regimes for Preventive Tooth Extractions in Patients with Antiresorptive Intake-A Retrospective Cohort Study

In the present study, the impacts on success rates between three different antibiotic regimes in patients receiving preventive tooth extraction during/after antiresorptive treatment were compared. For the retrospective analysis, we enrolled patients who had undergone tooth extraction from 2009 to 2019 according to the specified preventive conditions under antiresorptive therapy. Three antibiotic regimens were distinguished: (Group 1) intravenous for 7 days, (Group 2) oral for 14 days, and (Group 3) oral for 7 days of application. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw at 12 weeks after surgery. A total of 760 patients and 1143 extraction regions were evaluated (Group 1 n = 719; Group 2 n = 126; Group 3 n = 298). The primary endpoint showed no significant difference in the development of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw between the groups studied (Group 1 n = 50/669 (7%); Group 2 n = 9/117 (7%); Group 3 n = 17/281 (6%); p = 0.746). Overall, the success rate was 93% after intervention when preventive measures were followed. With the same success rate, a reduced, oral administration of antibiotics seems to be sufficient regarding the possible spectrum of side effects, the development of resistance and the health economic point of view.

Is clindamycin effective in preventing infectious complications after oral surgery? Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of clindamycin in the prevention of infection after oral surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA statement, the PICO-framework and included only randomized controlled clinical trials. In all studies clindamycin was administered to prevent infections in patients who underwent oral surgery. Two independent researchers conducted the search, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Included studies were classified by the type of oral surgery. Besides, data of patients, procedures and outcome variables were collected. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by using Mantel-Haenszel model and the number needed to treat (NNT). Finally, any potential sources of heterogeneity were estimated.

RESULTS

Seven trials of 540 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Four articles assessing the effect of oral clindamycin in third molar surgery were quantitatively analyzed. The overall RR was 0.66 (95% CI = 0.38-1.16), being non-statistically significant (p = 0.15). There was no heterogeneity between the studies I² = 0, p = 0.44. The NNT was 29 (95% CI = 12- -57).

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of clindamycin could not be evaluated except in third molar extraction. Oral clindamycin is ineffective in preventing infection in third molar surgery.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

There is a lack of high-quality evidence supporting the prescription of clindamycin to prevent infections after oral surgery, despite being frequently prescribed as an alternative for penicillin-allergic patients. Oral clindamycin has not been shown to be effective after third molar extractions.