Prophylactic antibiotic regimens in dental implant failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Effects of clindamycin and amoxycillin as prophylaxis against early implant failure: double-blinded randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) was to compare the frequency of early implant failure, postoperative infection, and pain/inflammation and the degree of implant stability between healthy non-penicillin-allergic individuals receiving a single prophylactic dose of 600 mg clindamycin versus 2 g amoxicillin at 1 h before implant surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center double-blinded RCT study with parallel groups was undertaken. Eighty-two patients fulfilled study inclusion criteria and were randomly assigned to the amoxicillin (n = 41) or clindamycin (n = 41) group. The primary outcome variable was early implant failure. The presence of infection was evaluated immediately after surgery and on days 7, 14, 30, and 90, and postoperative pain/inflammation was assessed daily on days 1 to 7 post-surgery. Resonance frequency analysis was used to measure primary and secondary implant stability.

RESULTS

One early implant failure was observed (1/81), in a patient from the amoxicillin group. No statistically significant between-group differences were observed in early implant failure rate, postoperative infection rate up to 90 days, pain/inflammation scores during the first week post-surgery, or primary or secondary stability values.

CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of 600 mg clindamycin before implant surgery does not increase the risk of early implant failure or infection.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that a single dose of 600 mg clindamycin at 1 h before implant surgery is a safe antibiotic prophylactic approach; however, when a more prolonged antibiotic therapy is required, it appears advisable to prescribe an alternative antibiotic to avoid adverse effects.

Is routine antibiotic prophylaxis warranted in dental implant surgery to prevent early implant failure? - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The question of whether antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered routinely for dental implant surgery is unresolved. Despite the lack of conclusive supportive evidence, antibiotics are often administered to reduce the risk of infection, which could lead to early implant failure. Increasing antibiotic resistance is a major concern and it is therefore important to reduce the overall use of antibiotics, including in dentistry. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative antibiotics in preventing early implant failure, in overall healthy patients undergoing dental implant surgery.

METHODS

An electronic search was undertaken of PubMed (Medline), Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to October 1st, 2023, to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs). All RCTs comparing antibiotic prophylaxis with no antibiotics/placebo in overall healthy patients receiving dental implants were included. The primary outcome was patients with early implant failure. Risk of bias was assessed, data were extracted, a meta-analysis was done, and GRADE certainty-of-evidence ratings were determined. The risk ratio (RR), the risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated.

RESULTS

After removal of duplicates, 1086 abstracts were screened, and 17 articles were reviewed in full text. Seven RCTs with moderate or low risk of bias and with a total of 1859 patients and 3014 implants were included in the meta-analysis. With reference to early implant failure at patient level, the meta-analysis failed to disclose any statistically significant difference (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.30-1.47) between antibiotic prophylaxis and a placebo. The risk difference was -0.007 (95% CI: -0.035-0.020) leading to a number needed to treat (NNT) of 143.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic prophylaxis for dental implant surgery does not seem to have any substantial effect on early implant failure ( ). The results do not support routine antibiotic prophylaxis for dental implant surgery.

Patterns of antibiotic prescription in implant dentistry and antibiotic resistance awareness among European dentists: A questionnaire-based study

OBJECTIVES

Antimicrobial resistance is an alarming global public health concern, threatening the effective treatment of common infections. This phenomenon is driven by the improper prescription of antibiotics. This study aimed to elucidate the patterns of antibiotic prescription in implant dentistry among European dentists and their awareness of antibiotic resistance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An anonymous online validated questionnaire was distributed via e-mail to 6431 recipients through the European Association for Osseointegration. It comprised of 17 structured questions investigating demographic variables, working environment, clinical experience, attitude towards antibiotic prescription in particular in relation to implant dentistry and COVID-19 pandemic, and awareness of antibiotic resistance. Data were collected from April to May 2023.

RESULTS

281 dentists from 33 European countries completed the survey. Almost 80% affirmed to routinely prescribe antibiotics as prophylaxis as well as after dental implant placement, especially in medically compromised patients or in cases of bone grafting. Amoxicillin, alone (61%) or in combination with clavulanic acid (56%), was the most common antibiotic of choice. Awareness of penicillin resistance among respondents was high. For peri-implantitis treatment, more than half reported the use of systemic antibiotics. The large majority (95%) did not prescribe more antibiotics since the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic. Less than 40% declared to follow national guidelines for antibiotic prescription.

CONCLUSION

This survey revealed a high prescription rate of antibiotics in implant dentistry, despite the awareness about antibiotic resistance among the respondents. The development and adherence to European guidelines has been identified as a potential strategy for improving antimicrobial stewardship.

Prescription of antibiotic prophylaxis in implant placement among Portuguese dentists: A web survey

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to assess whether antibiotic prophylaxis for dental implant placement is commonly used by dentists in Portugal.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional survey study was based on a web survey with 22 questions divided into 5 parts. The 1st part focused on demographic details, work experience, and academic expertise, whereas the 2nd and 3rd parts were about the pre- and postoperative antibiotic prescriptions. The 4th and 5th parts focused on dentists' motivation for using/avoiding antibiotic prophylaxis and the use of a protocol, respectively. Data interpretation included descriptive analysis and statistical inference via cross-tabling with chi-square adjusted standardised for residual effects.

RESULTS

Of the 204 valid surveys, at least one was received from every large Portuguese city which ensured the national coverage of the survey. Most respondents are not specialist dentists (72%). Sixty-four percent of the respondents always use antibiotic prophylaxis, while 29% adopt it only when grafting materials are employed. Most respondents use both pre- and postoperative regimens (55%). Amoxicillin 875 mg + clavulanic acid 125 mg is the most prescribed antibiotic (57%). Finally, the risk reduction of postoperative infection is the most frequent justification for the use of antibiotic prophylaxis (60%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results highlight that most of the respondents do not follow the consensual international guidelines for prophylactic antibiotherapy in dental implant placement surgeries. This finding should serve as a rationale to increase the dissemination of those guidelines.

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.

Factors associated with dental implant loss/complications in the Veterans Health Administration, 2015-2019

OBJECTIVES

Twelve percent of the U.S. population has a dental implant. Although rare, implant loss/complications can impact quality of life. This study evaluated indicators for implant loss/complications.

METHODS

Veterans with dental implants placed between 2015 and 2019 were included. Implant loss/complications were defined as implant removal or peri-implant defect treatment within 90 days. Binomial logistic regression identified factors associated with implant loss/complications.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2019, 48,811 dental implants were placed in 38,246 Veterans. Implant loss/complications was identified for 202 (0.4%) implants. In adjusted analyses, Veterans aged 50-64 years (OR = 1.92 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06, 3.46)) and ≥65 (OR = 2.01 (95% CI: 1.14, 3.53)) were more likely to have implant loss/complications. History of oral infection, tooth location, and number of implants placed all significantly increased the odds of loss/complications.

CONCLUSION

Dental implant loss/complications are rare outcomes. Older age, location of implant, and the number of implants placed during a visit were significant predictors of loss/complication.

Antibiotic Use in Dental Implant Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives: This project was developed from anecdotal evidence of varied practices around antibiotic prescribing in dental procedures. The aim of the study was to ascertain if there is evidence to support whether antibiotic (AB) use can effectively reduce postoperative infections after dental implant placements (DIPs). Materials and Methods: Following PRISMA-P© methodology, a systematic review of randomised controlled clinical trials was designed and registered on the PROSPERO© database. Searches were performed using PubMed®, Science Direct® and the Cochrane© Database, plus the bibliographies of studies identified. The efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics, independent of the regimen used, versus a placebo, control or no therapy based on implant failure due to infection was the primary measured outcome. Secondary outcomes were other post-surgical complications due to infection and AB adverse events. Results: Twelve RCTs were identified and analysed. Antibiotic use was reported to be statistically significant in preventing infection (p < 001). The prevention of complications was not statistically significant (p = 0.96), and the NNT was >5 (14 and 2523 respectively), which indicates that the intervention was not sufficiently effective to justify its use. The occurrence of side effects was not statistically significant (p = 0.63). NNH was 528 indicating that possible harm caused by the use of ABs is very small and does not negate the AB use when indicated. Conclusion: The routine use of prophylactic antibiotics to prevent infection in dental implant placement was found to be not sufficiently effective to justify routine use. Clear clinical assessment pathways, such as those used for medical conditions, based on the patients’ age, dental risk factors, such as oral health and bone health, physical risk factors, such as chronic or long-term conditions and modifiable health determinants, such as smoking, are required to prevent the unnecessary use of antibiotics.

Dental implant procedures contribution to the total antibiotic use in Swedish dentistry. A register-based study

OBJECTIVE

To study the influence of demographic and organizational factors to antibiotic utilization in dental implant surgery in Sweden.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Descriptive statistics regarding antibiotic prescription between 2009 and 2019 was retrieved from two national registers, the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register and the Dental Health register, both administered by the National Board of Health and Welfare.

RESULTS

During the years 2009-2019 a significant decrease of the proportion of prescriptions of systemic antibiotics in conjunction with implant surgical procedures occurred in all patient groups where the most common procedure was the insertion of a single implant. The proportion of dental visits when implant surgical treatment was performed which resulted in a prescription of antibiotics decreased significantly from 1/3 to approximately 1/5. However, comparing Public and Private dental care providers, the reduction was significantly greater in Public dental care. Patients with low level of education in urban regions, treated in Private dental clinics were more likely to receive antibiotics in conjunction to implant surgery compared to other groups. Phenoxymethylpenicillin is the most widely used substance in conjunction with implant surgery.

CONCLUSION

There is still room for improvement in reduction of antibiotic prescriptions in conjunction to implant surgical procedures in Sweden.

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.

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.

Antibiotic prophylaxis prescriptions prior to dental visits in the Veterans' Health Administration (VHA), 2015-2019

OBJECTIVE

To determine prophylaxis appropriateness by Veterans' Affairs (VA) dentists.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study of dental visits, 2015-2019.

METHODS

Antibiotics within 7 days before a visit in the absence of an oral infection were included. Appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis was defined as visits with gingival manipulation and further delineated into narrow and broad definitions based on comorbidities. The primary analysis applied a narrow definition of appropriate prophylaxis: cardiac conditions at the highest risk of an adverse outcome from endocarditis. The secondary analysis included a broader definition: cardiac or immunocompromising condition or tooth extractions and/or implants. Multivariable log-linear Poisson generalized estimating equation regression was used to assess the association between covariates and unnecessary prophylaxis prescriptions.

RESULTS

In total, 358,078 visits were associated with 369,102 antibiotics. The median prescription duration was 7 days (IQR, 7-10); only 6.5% were prescribed for 1 day. With the narrow definition, 15% of prophylaxis prescriptions were appropriate, which increased to 72% with the broader definition. Prophylaxis inconsistent with guidelines increased over time. For the narrow definition, Black (vs White) race, Latine (vs non-Latine) ethnicity, and visits located in the West census region were associated with unnecessary prophylaxis. Variables associated with a lower risk were older age, prosthetic joints, immunocompromising condition, and rural location.

CONCLUSIONS

Of every 6 antibiotic prophylaxis prescriptions, 5 were inconsistent with guidelines. Improving prophylaxis appropriateness and shortening duration may have substantial implications for stewardship. Guidelines should state whether antibiotic prophylaxis is indicated for extractions, implants, and immunocompromised patients.

Effect of antibiotic prophylaxis in dental implant surgery: A multicenter placebo-controlled double-blinded randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The growing resistance of bacteria to antimicrobial medicines is a global issue and a direct threat to human health. Despite this, antibiotic prophylaxis is often still routinely used in dental implant surgery to prevent bacterial infection and early implant failure, despite unclear benefits. There is a lack of sufficient evidence to formulate clear clinical guidelines and therefore there is a need for well-designed, large-scale randomized controlled trials to determine the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis.

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of a presurgical antibiotic regimen with an identical placebo regimen in healthy or relatively healthy patients receiving dental implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 474 patients participating in the study were recruited from seven clinics in southern Sweden. We randomized the patients into a test and a placebo group; the study was conducted double-blinded. Preoperatively, the test group received 2 g of amoxicillin and the control group, identical placebo tablets. The primary outcome was implant failure; secondary outcomes were postoperative infections and adverse events. Patients were evaluated at two follow-ups: at 7-14 days and at 3-6 months.

RESULTS

Postoperative evaluations of the antibiotic (n = 238) and the placebo (n = 235) groups noted implant failures (antibiotic group: six patients, 2.5% and placebo group: seven patients, 3.0%) and postoperative infections (antibiotic group: two patients, 0.8% and placebo group: five patients, 2.1%). No patient reported any adverse events. Between-group differences in implant failures and postoperative infections were nonsignificant.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic prophylaxis in conjunction with implant placement is likely of small benefit and should thus be avoided in most cases, especially given the unabated growth in antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03412305.

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

PURPOSE

To execute an evidence-based review answering the following questions: "What antibiotic type and mode of delivery are most effective at reducing inflammatory complications in third molar and dental implant surgery? What are the types and rates of antibiotic-related adverse reactions in the context of third molar surgery, infective endocarditis, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) and osteoradionecrosis (ORN)?"

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed studies using MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus/Elsevier, Google Scholar, and Wiley online library databases.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were reviewed for third molar surgery. Although there is some evidence that systemic antibiotics reduce inflammatory complications (infection and alveolar osteitis), routine use is not recommended for third molar surgery. For at-risk cases, a single preoperative dose of amoxicillin is preferred. Clindamycin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and erythromycin have a high adverse risk profile. Eight studies were reviewed for dental implant surgery. Antibiotics with dental implant placement showed little reduction in post surgery infection and minimal improvement in long-term success. A comprehensive search found limited data on antibiotic-related adverse effects in the context of infective endocarditis, MRONJ and ORN.

CONCLUSIONS

A set of clinical recommendations are presented to better guide evidence-based and standardized antibiotic usage on the basis of the literature discussed in this review. This review highlights the need for further research focusing on antibiotic type and timing of delivery with adverse drug reaction as a primary outcome measure when assessing treatment outcomes and complications in dentoalveolar surgery. This will better elucidate the risks vs benefits of antibiotic in dentoalveolar surgery.

Management of sinus graft infection-a systematic review

Sinus graft infections are rare but serious complications, as they are associated with significant morbidity and sinus graft loss. The aim of this study was to systematically review the management of sinus graft infection in order to define which protocols should be implemented. The terms searched in each database were "sinus graft infection management", "maxillary sinus lift infection", "maxillary sinus graft infection", "maxillary sinus elevation infection", and "maxillary sinus augmentation infection". The management of the sinus graft infection was assessed. The outcomes evaluated were maxillary sinus health and dental implantation results. The initial search yielded 1190 results. Eighteen articles were included, reporting a total of 3319 patients and 217 sinus graft infections. Drainage was performed with an intraoral approach in 13 studies, an endoscopic approach in two studies, and a combined approach in three studies. In every study, a disease-free sinus was finally obtained in all patients, but the outcomes of the graft and the dental implant were more varied. It is not possible to define the best treatment protocol for sinus graft infections based on the published data, since the level of evidence is poor. Management is very heterogeneous. This review highlights the necessity of surgical treatment associated with antibiotic therapy.

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.

Antibacterial and anti-inflammatory ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene/tea polyphenol blends for artificial joint applications

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the main causes for the failure of joint arthroplasty. In view of the limited clinical effect of oral/injectable antibiotics and the drug resistance problem, there is a pressing need to develop antibacterial implants with therapeutic antimicrobial properties. In this work, we prepared a highly antibacterial ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) implant by incorporating tea polyphenols. The presence of tea polyphenols not only improved the oxidation stability of irradiated UHMWPE, but also gave it the desirable antibacterial property. The potent antibacterial activity was attributed to the tea polyphenols that produced excess intracellular reactive oxygen species and destroyed the bacterial membrane structure. The tea polyphenol-blended UHMWPE had no biological toxicity to human adipose-derived stem cells and effectively reduced bacteria-induced inflammation in vivo. These results indicate that tea polyphenol-blended UHMWPE is promising for joint replacement prostheses with multifunctionality to meet patient satisfaction.

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.

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.