Effects of antibiotics on dental implants: a review

Carbon-Supported Nanocomposite Synthesis, Characterization, and Application as an Efficient Adsorbent for Ciprofloxacin and Amoxicillin

The existence of antibiotics in the environment has recently raised serious concerns about their possible hazards to human health and the water ecosystem. In the current study, an activated carbon-supported nanocomposite, AC-CoFe2O3, was synthesized by a coprecipitation method, characterized, and then applied to adsorb different drugs from water. The synthesized composites were characterized by using energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, Brunauer-Emmett-Teller plots, and scanning electron microscopy. The adsorption of both Ciprofloxacin (Cipro) and Amoxicillin (Amoxi) antibiotics on the composite followed the pseudo-second-order kinetic model (R2 = 0.9981 and 0.9974 mg g-1 min-1, respectively). Langmuir isotherm was the best-fit model showing 312.17 and 217.76 mg g-1 adsorption capacities for Ciprofloxacin and Amoxicillin, respectively, at 333 K. The negative Gibbs free energy (ΔG°) specified the spontaneity of the method. The positive change in the enthalpy (ΔH) indicated that the adsorption process was assisted by higher temperatures. The different optimized parameters were pH, contact time, adsorbent weight, concentration, and temperature. The maximum adsorption of Cipro was found to be 98.41% at pH 12, while for Amoxi, it was 89.09% at pH 2 at 333 K. The drugs were then successfully determined from natural water samples at optimized conditions using these nanocomposites.

A Cross-Sectional Study to Determine the Association of Corrected QT Interval With Microalbuminuria in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Introduction Cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is a frequent and life-threatening complication of type 2 diabetes. Failure to diagnose can lead to high mortality and morbidity. In patients who have diabetes mellitus, microalbuminuria is an independent marker for cardiovascular disease. This study aimed to assess the corrected QT interval with microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetes mellitus. The objective of this study was to estimate the corrected QT interval in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and to determine the association of the corrected QT interval with microalbuminuria type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methodology Ninety-five adult patients (>18 years to 65 years) diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus with microalbuminuria were included in this study. Data were collected on the proforma through history taking and a general physical and systemic examination. An electrocardiograph was taken on the day of admission; the most prolonged QT interval was measured, and the RR interval was calculated. The data were statistically analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24 (Released 2016; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States). Results There was a significant difference in the corrected QT interval prolongation prevalence between diabetic patients with microalbuminuria and without microalbuminuria (P-value <0.001). The mean corrected QT interval distribution did not differ significantly across various age groups of cases studied with microalbuminuria (P-value 0.98). The distribution of mean corrected QT interval did not differ significantly between the group of male cases and group of female cases studied with microalbuminuria (P-value 0.66). The mean corrected QT interval distribution did not differ significantly across various duration of diabetes groups among the cases studied with microalbuminuria (P-value 0.60). The mean corrected QT interval distribution did not differ significantly across different types of anti-diabetic treatment groups among the cases studied with microalbuminuria (P-value 0.64). Conclusion Type 2 diabetes has been prevalent in Indian and Asian populations. The early management of type 2 diabetes is necessary since the early stages of the disease can reduce the risk of CAN. Therefore, these patients should be diagnosed as early as possible and treated to reduce associated mortality and risk and to improve quality of care.

The effect of preoperative clindamycin in reducing early oral implant failure: a randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of preoperative oral clindamycin in reducing early implant failure in healthy adults undergoing conventional implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial in accordance with the ethical principles and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. We included healthy adults who underwent a single oral implant without previous infection of the surgical bed or the need for bone grafting. They were randomly treated with a single dose of oral clindamycin (600 mg) 1 h before surgery or a placebo. All surgical procedures were performed by one surgeon. A single trained observer evaluated all patients on postoperative days 1, 7, 14, 28, and 56. Early dental implant failure was defined as the loss or removal of an implant for any reason. We recorded the clinical, radiological, and surgical variables, adverse events, and postoperative complications. The study outcomes were statistically analysed to evaluate differences between the groups. Furthermore, we calculated the number required to treat or harm (NNT/NNH).

RESULTS

Both the control group and clindamycin group had 31 patients each. Two implant failures occurred in the clindamycin group (NNH = 15, p = 0.246). Three patients had postoperative infections, namely two placebo-treated and one clindamycin-treated, which failed (relative risk: 0.5, CI: 0.05-5.23, absolute risk reduction = 0.03, confidence interval: - 0.07-0.13, NNT = 31, CI: 7.2-∞, and p = 0.5). One clindamycin-treated patient experienced gastrointestinal disturbances and diarrhoea.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative clindamycin administration during oral implant surgery in healthy adults may not reduce implant failure or post-surgical-complications.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Oral clindamycin is not efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The present trial was registered (EudraCT number: 2017-002,168-42). It was approved by the Committee for the Ethics of Research with Medicines of Euskadi (CEIm-E) on 31 October 2018 (internal code number: 201862) and the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS) on 18 December 2018.

Consensus Report on Preventive Antibiotic Therapy in Dental Implant Procedures: Summary of Recommendations from the Spanish Society of Implants

Current patterns of preventive antibiotic prescribing are encouraging the spread of antimicrobial resistance. Recently, the Spanish Society of Implants (SEI) developed the first clinical practice guidelines published to date, providing clear guidelines on how to prescribe responsible and informed preventive antibiotic therapy (PAT) based on the available scientific evidence on dental implant treatments (DIs). The present document aims to summarise and disseminate the recommendations established by this expert panel. These were based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies were analysed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklist templates and ranked according to their level of evidence. They were then assigned a level of recommendation using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system (GRADE). Guidelines were established on the type of PAT, antibiotic and dosage of administration in the placement of DIs without anatomical constraints, in bone augmentation with the placement of DIs in one or two stages, placement of immediate DIs, sinus elevations, implant prosthetic phase, as well as recommendations in patients allergic to penicillin. Therefore, the PAT must be adapted to the type of implant procedure to be performed.

The efficacy of systemic antibiotics as an adjunct to surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Microbial biofilm accumulation is the main cause of peri-implantitis. The majority of surgical peri-implantitis treatment protocols suggests adjunctive use of systemic antibiotics to target specific putative bacteria. The aim of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the adjunctive use of systemically administered antibiotics in surgical treatment of peri-implantitis by reviewing previously published systematic reviews and primary studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in four electronic databases (MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science) for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and systematic reviews reporting surgical treatment of peri-implantitis with and without adjunctive systemically administered antibiotic therapy. The included systematic reviews and primary studies were qualitatively assessed using AMSTAR and GRADE, respectively. No restrictions were set for date of publication, journal, or language.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 681 papers. Only seven systematic reviews and two primary studies met the inclusion criteria. Four out of seven included systematic reviews concluded that no evidence exists for use of systemic antibiotics to improve the clinical outcomes in surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. One review did not estimate the level of evidence, one did not clearly state any beneficial effect, whereas one reported a limited adjunctive effect. Further, the two included primary studies did not show a long-term significant benefit of adjunctive use of systemically administrated antibiotics. However, one study reported a short-term adjunctive effect in patients with modified surface implants. Due to heterogeneity in study design, low number of included primary studies, and grade of bias, no meta-analysis was performed.

CONCLUSION

The use of systemically administered antibiotics as an adjunct to surgical interventions of peri-implantitis cannot be justified as a part of a standard treatment protocol. A pervasive problem is the lack of uniform diagnosis criteria for peri-implantitis, deficient information about patient characteristics, absence of high quality long-term randomised controlled trials, and authors' declaration on conflict of interest.

Is Perioperative Antibiotic Necessary in Straightforward Implant Placement Procedures?

The purpose of this nonrandom retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the impact of perioperative antibiotic on early outcomes, including postoperative pain, swelling, bleeding, and cyanosis, in patients undergoing dental implant placement before prosthetic loading. Seventy-five patients (45 men, 30 women) who had completed dental implant placement were included in the study. Patients who used perioperative antibiotics comprised the experimental group, and those who did not comprised the control group. The experimental group received 2 g amoxicillin + clavulanic acid 1 hour before surgery and 1 g amoxicillin + clavulanic acid twice a day for 5 days after surgery. The control group received no perioperative antibiotic therapy. Data on pain, swelling, bleeding, cyanosis, flap dehiscence, suppuration, and implant failure were analyzed on postoperative days 2, 7, and 14 and at week 12. No statistically significant difference was detected between the 2 groups with regard to pain and swelling on postoperative days 2, 7, and 14 and week 12 (P > .05), while the severity of pain and swelling were greater on day 2 than on days 7 and 14 and week 12 in both groups (P = .001 and P < .05, respectively). Similarly, no significant difference was found between the 2 groups with regard to postoperative bleeding and cyanosis. Although flap dehiscence was more severe on day 7 in the experimental group, no significant difference was found between the 2 groups with regard to the percentage of flap dehiscence assessed at other time points. Within the limitations of the study, it has been demonstrated that antibiotic use has no effect on implant failure rates in dental implant surgery with a limited number of implants. We conclude that perioperative antibiotic use may not be required in straightforward implant placement procedures. Further randomized controlled clinical studies with more patients and implants are needed to substantiate our findings.

Preventive Antibiotic Prescribing Habits among Professionals Dedicated to Oral Implantology: An Observational Study

The prescription of preventive antibiotics (PA) in oral implantology is a controversial issue. The study aimed to determine the prescribing habits of PA in professionals dedicated to oral implantology in various treatments in healthy and at-risk patients. This is a cross-sectional observational study based on the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines. An electronic survey consisting of 4 blocks of questions was sent to members of the Spanish Society of Implants. The data were analyzed using descriptive analysis. A total of 303 participants (20.8%) responded to the questionnaire. One percent never prescribed PA, 55.4% prescribed them always, and 43.6% prescribed them sometimes. Ninety-six percent administered them preoperatively, while 92.4% administered them postoperatively. The most commonly used antibiotic is amoxicillin followed by amoxicillin with clavulanic acid (875/125 mg). Clindamycin is the most commonly administered antibiotic in patients with allergies. Professionals dedicated to oral implantology frequently prescribe PA in both healthy and at-risk patients, especially perioperatively. Immediate implant placement, sinus lifts, bone regeneration, and multiple implant placement are the treatments in which PA are most commonly prescribed, as well as in patients with heart valve prostheses or a history of bacterial endocarditis and immunodeficiency.

Antibiotic prophylaxis during dental implant placement in the UK

Background Antimicrobial resistance is a growing concern globally. It has previously been demonstrated that antibiotic prescribing for dental implants within the UK is varied with an apparent lack of guidance. This study aimed to establish current use of antibiotic prophylaxis during dental implant placements in the UK.Method An anonymous validated online questionnaire was distributed to members of the BAOS, BSSPD, BSP, ADI and ITI. Data were then collated and analysed.Results Two hundred and twenty-nine responses were received during April-July 2018. Fifty-five percent of dentists routinely prescribed antibiotics during implant placements. One-third did sometimes, but not routinely. Thirteen percent never prescribed. Reported protocols contained 61 different drug/dose combinations given over 124 different regimens. Those who prescribed routinely had significantly higher levels of training/qualification (P = 0.008), placed more implants (P = 0.014) and undertook more complex placements (P = 0.002) than non-prescribers. Seventy-three percent believed antibiotics decrease post-operative infection. One in ten felt they gave no benefit. Half believed they decrease implant failure. Over 90% would like national guidelines.Conclusion Significant variance in practice is clear. Almost half of practitioners did not routinely prescribe. Those who did were significantly more experienced, highly trained and did more complex placements. There was a difference between practitioners' perceived benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis and the evidence in the literature. There was a great desire for clearer guidance.

Antibiotic prescribing habits of the clinicians dealing with dental implant surgery in Turkey: a questionnaire study

PURPOSE

Although various prophylactic and/or postoperative systemic antibiotic regimens have been suggested to minimize failure after dental implant placement and postoperative infection, the role of antibiotics in implant dentistry is still controversial. The purposes of this questionnaire study were to determine the current antibiotic prescribing habits of clinicians in conjunction with dental implant placement and to understand whether any consensus has been reached among implant surgery performing clinicians.

METHODS

An electronic questionnaire was sent by electronic mail to all members of the Turkish Dental Society. The questions were related to whether antibiotics were routinely prescribed either pre- or/and postoperatively during routine dental implant placement. The respondents were also asked to specify their workplace and education. The results were analyzed using SPSS software. Descriptive and chi-square analyses were used to compare categorical data; Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the quantitative data by category.

RESULTS

A total of 429 members responded to the questionnaire. The clinicians having more experience had a greater tendency to prescribe preoperative antibiotics (p < 0.001), but there was no statistically significant difference between the postoperative antibiotic prescription choice of the clinician according to the clinicians' experience (p > 0.05). A total of 175 of the clinicians preferred to prescribe preoperative antibiotics when there was systemic comorbidity; 99 of the clinicians preferred to prescribe antibiotics before every implant surgery. The aminopenicillins were the most commonly prescribed antibiotics by the clinicians. A total of 38.58% of the respondents (n = 130) who were prescribing preoperative antibiotics, 2000 mg aminopenicillin was given 1 h before the surgical procedure. Dentists and solo private practitioners were prescribing more preoperative antibiotics (p < 0,05).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no consensus among clinicians regarding the use of antibiotics in association with routine dental implant placement. Aminopenicillins were the most commonly prescribed antibiotics for both pre- and postoperatively. Furthermore, most of the antibiotic regimens being used are not in accordance with the current published data.

Microbial ingress and in vitro degradation enhanced by glucose on bioabsorbable Mg-Li-Ca alloy

Biodegradable magnesium alloys are challenging to be implanted in patients with hyperglycemia and diabetes. A hypothesis is suggested that glucose accelerates microbial ingress and in vitro degradation of Mg-Li-Ca implants. Corrosion resistance and mechanical properties was demonstrated using electrochemical, hydrogen evolution and tensile tests. The bacteria from Hank's solution were isolated via 16S rRNA gene analysis. The results revealed that Mg-1Li-1Ca alloy exhibited different responses to Hank's solution with and without glucose. The solution acidity was ascribed to Microbacterium hominis and Enterobacter xiangfangensis, indicating that glucose promoted microbial activity and degradation and deterioration in mechanical property of Mg-1Li-1Ca alloy.

Antimicrobial Prescription Habits of Dentists Performing Dental Implant Treatments in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic

The use of antibiotics in implant treatments is controversial. The purpose of this research was to study the behaviors of Santo Domingo dentists who prescribe antimicrobials to patients for the placement of dental implants. A total of 99 dentists participated in the study. A share of 1.2% of dentists prescribed antimicrobials solely in the preoperative period, 8.6% after surgery, 44.4% before and after, 19.8% only in specific situations, and 25.9% did not prescribe at all. Amoxicillin was the predominant antimicrobial of choice. A cross-sectional, observational, survey-based study was conducted. The items studied were demographics, self-assessment of knowledge about antibiotics and when they are used, as well as their recommended dosage and duration, in healthy and non-allergic patients. Notable variability was found in the prescription behaviors of antimicrobials. Bridging gaps in knowledge on the subject could help to standardize prescription guidelines.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for implant placement: a systematic review of effects on reduction of implant failure

Introduction Despite excellent reviews in the past several years, the use of antibiotics as prophylaxis for implant placement remains controversial.Aim To assess the literature on the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics prescribed prior to and immediately following implant surgery (PIFS).Outcomes Whether administration of antibiotics reduced implant failure and post-operative complications.Design Databases searched were PubMed and Medline via Ovid (1946 to February 2018), Cochrane Library (Wiley) and Google Scholar.Materials and methods Quality assessment, meta-analysis with a forest plot and incorporated assessment of heterogeneity. A two-tailed paired t-test was performed, analysing differences in mean failure rates between groups.Results Fourteen publications were collected; 5,334 implants were placed with pre-operative antibiotics, 82 implants with antibiotics PIFS and 3,862 placed with no antibiotics. The overall risk ratio (RR) was 0.47 (95% CI 0.39-0.58), with the implant failure rates significantly affected by pre-operative intervention (Z = 7.00, P <0.00001). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 35 (95% CI 26.3-48.2). The difference between mean failure rates was statistically significant (P = 0.0335).Conclusion Administering prophylactic antibiotics reduced the risk of implant failures. Further investigations are recommended to establish a standardised protocol for the proper use of antibiotic regimen.

Antibiotic prophylaxis habits in oral implant surgery among dentists in Italy: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

The prescription of prophylactic antibiotics in conjunction with oral implant surgery remains inconsistent among different populations of dentists. The main objective of this study was to assess the current antibiotic prescribing habits of dentist in conjunction with oral implant surgery in Italy. The secondary objective was to assess the nature and amount (mg) of antibiotics prescriptions in order to evaluate whether any consensus has been reached and if the current recommendations are complied.

METHODS

Observational cross-sectional study based on a web-survey reported according to the STROBE guidelines. A questionnaire was sent via email to each registered member of the Italian Academy of Osseointegration (n = 400). The email included a link to the anonym web questionnaire developed on www.encuestafacil.com. It contained close-ended and some open-ended questions concerning demographics, antibiotic type, prescription duration and dosage. Collected data were analyzed using STATA® 14 software.

RESULTS

160 participants responded the survey (response rate = 40%). Approximately 84% routinely prescribed prophylactic antibiotics in conjunction with oral implant surgery, 15.6% prescribed antibiotics in certain situations and only 1 did not prescribe antibiotics at all. Overall, 116 respondents prescribed both pre- and postoperative antibiotics, 29 prescribed antibiotics only preoperatively and 14 prescribed antibiotics exclusively after surgery. Italian dentists prescribed an average amount of 10,331 mg antibiotics before, during or after oral implant surgery. Approximately, only 17% (n = 27) of the participants who prescribed antibiotics before oral implant surgery complied with the recommendations proposed by the latest publications (no more than 3 g of preoperative amoxicillin before oral implant surgery).

CONCLUSIONS

Dentists in Italy on a large scale prescribe antibiotic prophylaxis in conjunction with oral implant surgery among healthy patients. A high range of prophylactic regimens is prescribed and they are not adhering to the new science-based specifications. Guidelines focused on the indications for prophylactic antibiotics among healthy patients are required to prevent bacterial resistance, side effects and costs caused by overtreatment and the irrational use of antibiotics.

Attitudes of dental implantologists in Spain to prescribing antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in healthy patients

Background

The implantologists frequently prescribe antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in dental implant surgery. The aims of this study were to evaluate the attitudes of implantologists in Murcia (Spain) to prescribing antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in healthy patients during different implant dentistry procedures, and to see how these are influenced by individual dentist’s academic level, professional experience, and ongoing training (attending courses or reading scientific literature on medication use)

Material and Methods

This cross-sectional study included a total of 200 implantologists from the Murcia area (Spain), who each completed a two-page questionnaire consisting of 26 questions.

Results

The implant procedure in which most dentists (n=97) prescribed antibiotics was multiple implant surgery with flap raising, in which 55.6% of these 97 respondents used a prophylactic antibiotic regime for 7 days after implant placement. All subjects (n=200) prescribed analgesics for eight out of the eleven procedures included in the survey and anti-inflammatories in six. Dentists with higher academic levels or longer professional experience prescribed more antibiotics, but those who underwent continuous training (attending courses or reading scientific literature) reduced antibiotic prescription.

Conclusions

Dentists often prescribed antibiotics, analgesics and anti-inflammatories in almost all implant procedures in healthy patients, but ongoing training reduced the frequency of antibiotic prescription in some procedures.

Key words:Antibiotics, analgesics, anti-inflammatories, dental implant, oral surgery.

Trends and racial/ethnic disparities in antibiotic prescribing practices of dentists in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine trends and racial/ethnic disparities in antibiotic prescribing practices of dentists in the United States.

METHODS

The US Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data for 1996-2013 was analyzed. Information on patient sociodemographic characteristics, dental visits, receipt of dental procedures, and type of antibiotics prescribed following visits was obtained. Descriptive statistics were calculated separately for each year. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify associations during the period with and without adjustment for dental procedures and sociodemographic characteristics. Survey weights were incorporated to handle the sampling design.

RESULTS

Nationally, the number of antibiotic prescribed at dental visits was estimated to be higher by 842,749 (0.4 percent) at year 2013 compared to the prescription level at 2003 were the population sociodemographic distribution kept at 2013 level. On average, the odds of prescribing antibiotics following dental care increased with each decade of study (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: [1.04, 1.17]) after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and receipt of dental procedures. Compared to Whites, Blacks had 21 percent (95% CI: 11%, 31%) higher odds of receiving a prescription for antibiotics from a dentist after adjusting for dental procedure and other sociodemographic characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The prescription of antibiotics following dental visits increased over time after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics and dental procedure. The probability of being prescribed antibiotics by dentists was higher for Blacks compared to Whites.

The Pattern of Antibiotic Prescribing by Dental Practitioners in Zagreb, Croatia

BACKGROUND

Bacterial resistance is considered a consequence of misuse or overuse of antibiotics. Dentistry significantly contributes to this increasing public health problem. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to examine the pattern of antibiotics prescribed by Croatian dentists in Zagreb area.

METHODS

Out of 220 Doctors of Dental Medicine (DMDs) from Zagreb 110 responded to survey. Prior to the research an ethical approval was obtained. Participants were directly contacted. The questionnaire consisted of two parts: general data on DMDs and the part concerning indications, duration, type and dosage of antibiotic therapy. Data were processed using MS Excel and SPSS for Windows, Version 17.0. Statistical significance was tested by Fisher's exact test, chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman's rank correlation at the level of statistical significance p<0.05.

RESULTS

During the period of two months, the doctors prescribed antibiotics to 1,500 patients, 690 (46%) were men and 810 (54%) women. The most often prescribed antibiotics were penicillin (72.5% of patients), represented mostly by amoxicillin in combination with clavulanic acid (57.6%). The most common indication for the prescribed antibiotics was periapical or periodontal abscess (44%). Definite clinical indication (71.2%) was stated as the most common reason for antibiotic prescription. Antibiotic therapy usually lasted 7 days (62.9%). The doctors prescribed daily doses of antibiotics according to the instructions for the use of specific drugs.

CONCLUSION

The examined subjects prescribe antibiotics according to the curriculum taught at the School of Dental Medicine for majority of types, doses and duration of the treatments, although antibiotics over-prescription in cases without medical indication was observed. The national guidelines on antibiotic regimens are required in order to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use.

Current Trend of Antimicrobial Prescription for Oral Implant Surgery Among Dentists in India

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to evaluate antimicrobial prescription behaviour amongst dentists performing oral implant surgery in India.

STUDY DESIGN

Dentists performing oral implant surgery from different parts of India were personally approached during various national events such as conferences and academic meetings and information regarding their prescription habits for antimicrobial agents in routine oral implant surgery was collected using a structured questionnaire.

RESULTS

Out of a total sample of 332 dentists, 85.5 % prescribed 17 different groups or combinations of antibiotics routinely for oral implant surgery in the normal healthy patient. Majority preferred the peri-operative protocol of drug therapy (72.2 %) with variable and prolonged duration of therapy after surgery, ranging from 3 to 10 days. An antimicrobial mouthwash was routinely prescribed by all the doctors (14.5 %) not in favour of prescribing antimicrobials in a normal healthy patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that there is a trend of antimicrobial agent misuse by dentists performing oral implant surgery in India, both in terms of drugs used and the protocols prescribed. The majority of these dentists prescribed a variety of antimicrobial agents for prolonged durations routinely even in the normal, healthy patients.

Antibiotics in periodontal surgeries: A prospective randomised cross over clinical trial

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

(1) To evaluate the need of antibiotics in periodontal surgeries in reducing postsurgical infections and explore if antibiotics have any key role in reducing or eliminating inflammatory complications. (2) To establish the incidence of postoperative infections in relation to type of surgery and determine those factors, which may affect infection rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective randomized double-blind cross over clinical study was carried out for a period of 1-year with predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. All the patients included in the study for any periodontal surgery were randomly divided into three categories: Group A (prophylactic), Group B (therapeutic), and Group C (no antibiotics). Patients were followed up for 1-week after surgery on the day of suture removal and were evaluated for pain, swelling, fever, infection, delayed wound healing and any other significant findings. Appropriate statistical analysis was carried out to evaluate the objectives and P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

No infection was reported in any of 90 sites. Patients reported less pain and postoperative discomfort when prophylactic antibiotics were given. However, there were no statistical significant differences between the three groups.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

There was no postoperative infection reported in all the 90 sites operated in this study. The prevalence of postoperative infections following periodontal surgery is <1% and this low risk does not justify the routine use of systemic antimicrobials just to prevent infections. Use of prophylactic antibiotics may have role in prevention of inflammatory complication, but again not infection.

Indications of antibiotic prophylaxis in dental practice- review

Antibiotics are frequently used in dental practice. Clinical and bacteriological epidemiological factors determine the indications of antibiotics in dentistry. Antibiotics are used in addition to appropriate treatment to aid the host defences in the elimination of remaining bacteria. It is indicated when there is evidence of clinical sign involvement and spread of infection. Antibiotics are prescribed in dental practice for treating odontoge nic infections, non-odontogenic infections, as prophylaxis against focal and local infection. Special care needs to be addressed to patients with organ transplants, poorly controlled diabetes and pregnancy. Antibiotics should be used only as an adjunct to dental treatment and never alone as the first line of care. The present paper reviews the indications of antibiotics in dental practice.