Jens-Uwe Peter, Johannes Ladewig, Christian Stoll, Oliver Zolk
{"title":"Antibiotic prophylaxis in oral implant surgery in Germany: a cross-sectional study.","authors":"Jens-Uwe Peter, Johannes Ladewig, Christian Stoll, Oliver Zolk","doi":"10.1186/s40729-024-00577-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Prophylactic antibiotics are used in dental implants to reduce infection risk and implant failure, especially benefiting patients with risk factors. However, evidence suggests that using clindamycin or extending antibiotics postoperatively has an unfavorable risk-benefit ratio.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This national cross-sectional study analyzed antibiotic prophylaxis during implant insertion across Germany. Dentists from the German Society for Oral Implantology (DGOI) provided demographic information and data on the next 10 consecutive implant patients, including age, sex, risk factors, type of implantation, and antibiotic details.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>103 dentists participated, providing data on 1040 patients. Most dentists were male and aged 30-64. Patients were evenly split between genders, with an average age of 51 years. Antibiotics were administered in 87.6% of all cases, more frequently for patients undergoing bone augmentation (OR 7.01, p < 0.0001), immediate (OR 3.11, p = 0.002) or delayed (OR 5.30, p < 0.0001) implant insertion, and those with cardiovascular disease (OR 3.24, p = 0.009). 74.8% of implantologists tended to use antibiotic prophylaxis routinely, while the remaining implantologists decided on a case-by-case basis. Implantologists primarily used aminopenicillins for 63.8% of prescriptions and clindamycin for the remaining 35.6%. Additionally, 78.8% of patients with prophylaxis received postoperative, multi-day treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study reveals extensive antibiotic use for perioperative prophylaxis in implant surgery, often not justified by current recommendations, particularly concerning the choice of antibiotic (e.g., clindamycin) and duration (e.g., postoperative use). Specialized clinical guidelines and targeted training for dentists on antibiotic prophylaxis are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":14076,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","volume":"10 1","pages":"62"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11649591/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-024-00577-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Prophylactic antibiotics are used in dental implants to reduce infection risk and implant failure, especially benefiting patients with risk factors. However, evidence suggests that using clindamycin or extending antibiotics postoperatively has an unfavorable risk-benefit ratio.
Methods: This national cross-sectional study analyzed antibiotic prophylaxis during implant insertion across Germany. Dentists from the German Society for Oral Implantology (DGOI) provided demographic information and data on the next 10 consecutive implant patients, including age, sex, risk factors, type of implantation, and antibiotic details.
Results: 103 dentists participated, providing data on 1040 patients. Most dentists were male and aged 30-64. Patients were evenly split between genders, with an average age of 51 years. Antibiotics were administered in 87.6% of all cases, more frequently for patients undergoing bone augmentation (OR 7.01, p < 0.0001), immediate (OR 3.11, p = 0.002) or delayed (OR 5.30, p < 0.0001) implant insertion, and those with cardiovascular disease (OR 3.24, p = 0.009). 74.8% of implantologists tended to use antibiotic prophylaxis routinely, while the remaining implantologists decided on a case-by-case basis. Implantologists primarily used aminopenicillins for 63.8% of prescriptions and clindamycin for the remaining 35.6%. Additionally, 78.8% of patients with prophylaxis received postoperative, multi-day treatments.
Conclusions: The study reveals extensive antibiotic use for perioperative prophylaxis in implant surgery, often not justified by current recommendations, particularly concerning the choice of antibiotic (e.g., clindamycin) and duration (e.g., postoperative use). Specialized clinical guidelines and targeted training for dentists on antibiotic prophylaxis are needed.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Implant Dentistry is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal is dedicated to promoting the exchange and discussion of all research areas relevant to implant dentistry in the form of systematic literature or invited reviews, prospective and retrospective clinical studies, clinical case reports, basic laboratory and animal research, and articles on material research and engineering.