Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology
Oral and maxillofacial surgeryA prospective placebo-controlled double-blind trial of antibiotic prophylaxis in intraoral bone grafting procedures: a pilot study
Introduction
Although a great deal of investigation has been done concerning the use of prophylactic antibiotics in oral surgery, a consensus on when they are necessary has not been achieved. Postoperative surgical wound infections can have a significant effect on the outcome of surgery, which explains why patients are given preoperative or postoperative systemic antibiotics in many cases.
Oral surgery should be considered clean-contaminated operative procedures, since the intraoral surgical access inevitably entails contamination of the surgical wound with the facultative pathogenic mixed flora of the oral cavity. Also, the bacteria most frequently isolated in post-surgical infections for the most part are thought to originate from the bacteria that make up the endogenous micro-flora of the oral cavity.1
Peterson2 estimated the chance of infection in intraoral orthognathic surgical procedures without antibiotics to be 10-15%, while others3 found a higher postoperative wound infection rate (20-31%). With a short-term antibiotic prophylaxis, Lindeboom et al.4 recently found a 2.8-5.6% infection rate in mandibular sagittal ramus osteotomies.
Infections are sufficiently frequent in oral bone grafting procedures that administration of a prophylactic agent may be effective in reducing postoperative morbidity, costs, and duration of hospitalization. However, the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotic administration in buccal onlay reconstructive surgery is largely unstudied, and most oral and maxillofacial clinics use prolonged antibiotic administration for a period between 5 and 10 days in these procedures.5, 6
No controlled studies of peri-operative antibiotic prophylaxis in bone grafting procedures have demonstrated that prophylaxis will reduce postoperative infectious morbidity. There has been a paucity of data reported that details the use of prophylactic antibiotics in oral bone grafting procedures.
Pheneticillin is an oral acid-resistant penicillin analogous to penicillin V, with a range of antimicrobial activity similar to that of penicillin G.7 The property of acid resistance permits a more reliable effect from oral administration. After oral administration, peak serum levels are obtained within one-half to one hour. Higher and more prolonged serum levels are obtained compared to penicillin V administration.7
The objective of this study was to prospectively compare the outcome in preprosthetic intraoral bone grafting comparing a prophylactic oral administration of pheneticillin with a placebo.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
This pilot study was designed prospectively and performed at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The study comprised two groups of patients, namely the penicillin group and a placebo group.
The penicillin group was comprised of 10 patients, 6 males and 4 females, with a mean age of 26.8 years (range 18 to 45 years), and the placebo group comprised ten patients, 5 males and 5 females, with a mean age of
Results
All patients (n = 20) could be evaluated for infectious morbidity. The patient groups were comparable with respect to age and sex distribution. Two patients developed a wound infection at the receptor site, two patients developed an infection at both the receptor and donor site, one patient developed an infection at the donor site only. All of these patients received a placebo. No infections were seen in the phenethicillin group (Fig 1). Infections at the receptor site were seen at days 6-8,
Discussion
In this study, an attempt was made to clarify some of the confusion surrounding the topic of antibiotic prophylaxis in intra-oral bone grafting procedures. Studies on prophylactic administration in implant dentistry are lacking, although antibiotics are one of the largest single groups of drugs prescribed. Knowledge about their use is essential, not only because of their cost, but also because the price of their misuse may be unnecessary morbidity and mortality, high rates of hospital
References (10)
- et al.
Prophylactic single-dose administration of 600 mg clindamycin versus 4-time administration of 600 mg clindamycin in orthognathic surgerya prospective randomized study in bilateral mandibular sagittal ramus osteotomies
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod
(2003) - et al.
Bacteriology and treatment of dental infections
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol
(1980) - et al.
Antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgerya 1-day versus 5-day regimen
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(1999) Zur Klinik der ungezielten Antibiotik-Therapie bei Infektionen im Kiefer-Gesichtsbereich
Dtsch Z. Mund Kiefer-Gesichtschir
(1988)- et al.
Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in intraoral orthognathic surgery
J Oral Surg
(1976)
Cited by (41)
Evaluating the efficacy of single-shot versus prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis in alveolar cleft osteoplasty – A retrospective cohort study
2023, Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial SurgeryPreventive antibiotic therapy in bone augmentation procedures in oral implantology: A systematic review
2022, Journal of Stomatology, Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryCitation Excerpt :Of the 4 RCTs [4,14–16] included in this review, three of them [4,15,16] prescribed both test and control groups a preoperative dose of antibiotic, without comparing the administration of these drugs with placebo or non-prescription of antibiotics, so the conclusions drawn by these studies should be interpreted with caution. The reason is that they refer to a previous study by Lindeboom et al. (2003) [17] in which they concluded that the prescription of antibiotics in bone augmentation procedures with autologous bone blocks was necessary as the infection rate in the control group (placebo) compared to the test group (which was prescribed 2 g fenethylline) was 40%. It is worth mentioning that they only included 10 patients in each group, which is an excessively small sample, which was defended by the authors as the high infection rate of the control group did not justify continuing with the study.
Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in intraoral bone grafting procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
2020, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryCitation Excerpt :Meta-analysis was attempted for the primary outcome and all secondary study outcomes. A meta-analysis could not be conducted for the comparison of AP and no antibiotic/placebo, as only one trial by Lindeboom and van den Akker21 studied this comparison. A meta-analysis of only two studies could be conducted for the primary outcome of POI due to the limited trials published on the topic.
Unusual costochondral bone graft complication
2013, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryCitation Excerpt :To minimize the infection risk, antibiotics were administered intravenously postoperatively and pursued orally. A prospective controlled study of intraoral bone grafting showed an increase in infectious complications after intraoral bone grafts without antibiotic prophylaxis10. No guidelines have been established for intraoral bone grafts.
Antibiotic Prophylaxis to Prevent Surgical Site Infections in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
2012, Current Therapy in Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryAntibiotic Prophylaxis to Prevent Surgical Site Infections in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
2011, Current Therapy in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery