BACKGROUND: No consistent approach to the management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) during and after oral surgery has been established. Thus, DOACs may be unnecessarily discontinued, raising the potential risk of life-threatening thromboembolism. To address the inconsistency in this approach, our study assessed the risk of bleeding and other complications in patients who continue to use DOACs during and after simple and surgical tooth extractions.

METHODS: Between May 2016 and December 2023, this prospective study recruited patients aged 18 years or older who were receiving a DOAC or warfarin and were in need of simple or surgical extractions of one or more teeth. Local haemostatic agents were being used to control bleeding. Patients were instructed to manage minor postoperative bleeding at home by biting down on gauze soaked in tranexamic acid for at least 30 min. After surgery, all patients were followed for 7 days. The chi-squared test compared dichotomous variables; the two-sample t-test, continuous variables; logistic regressions, dichotomous outcomes; and linear regressions, continuous outcomes.

RESULTS: In all, 354 teeth were extracted from 160 patients receiving DOACs and 56 patients receiving warfarin. The incidence of any type of postoperative bleeding was 27% in patients receiving DOACs and 37% in those receiving warfarin (OR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.28-1.57; p = 0.35). Most patients were able to manage any bleeding at home themselves. Clinically relevant bleeding necessitating prompt evaluation or a secondary surgical intervention by a dentist or healthcare professional occurred in 3% of patients receiving DOACs and 11% of patients receiving warfarin (OR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.08-1.06; p = 0.06). No reports of major bleeding requiring hospitalization or blood transfusion were found. Perioperative bleeding volume was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving DOACs without interruption during surgery may have a lower risk of bleeding than those on warfarin. Patients may safely continue to use DOACs during and after simple and surgical extractions. This eliminates the potentially higher risk of serious thromboembolic events that are associated with a pause in anticoagulant therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04662515). Retrospectively registered 4 December 2020.

Background: Antibiotic prophylaxis in dental implant surgery remains a contentious topic, with varying guidelines and clinical practices worldwide.

Aim: Report how Swedish dentists use antibiotic prophylaxis during dental implant surgery, based in a review of patient records.

Method: This retrospective, cross-sectional study evaluated the antibiotic prophylaxis habits of Swedish dentists, focusing on the relationship between surgical complexity and antibiotic use.

Results: Data from 450 patient records with registered implant surgeries at two major dental care providers, one public and one private, were analysed. Thirty-seven clinics provided the data, and 109 dentists performed the surgeries. Findings revealed that 72.2% of implant surgeries were straightforward procedures, with no administration of antibiotic prophylaxis in 70.5% of these. Conversely, 90% of bone augmentation cases involved antibiotic use, particularly in complex protocols utilizing synthetic materials and membranes. Overall, 54.4% of patients in the study population received no antibiotic prophylaxis at all. Surgical complexity was a significant predictor for antibiotic administration, while patient-specific factors, such as age, chronic diseases, and tobacco use, had limited influence.

Conclusion: Restrained antibiotic use in implant surgery in Sweden reflects alignment with current stewardship goals, particularly in straight forward procedures. However, continued administration in some uncomplicated cases and frequent use in complex surgeries highlight the need for clearer, evidence-based guidelines and standardized antibiotic protocols.

Introduction: Continuing professional development is a lifelong learning process. One pedagogical approach that can be used is active learning. Flipped classroom is a method that has been shown to improve deeper conceptual understanding. In an online setting, the method saves travel, time, and costs. To our knowledge, flipped classroom is rarely used in continuing professional education. This study in general dentistry explored experiences of an online flipped classroom course in continuing professional development.

Materials and Methods: Fifteen dental hygienists, clinically active in general dental care, were interviewed. They were recruited from an online course on the latest classification system for periodontal diseases. The course had been conducted using an active learning and flipped classroom model. The interviews were semi-structured. Data were extracted using qualitative content analysis.

Results: The experiences of the dental hygienists could be summarized in three themes: Stimulation of knowledge gain through self-paced studies, The ease of virtual networking among colleagues, and Fostering of direct practical application through collaboration.

Conclusion: New and emerging communication technology seems to open new possibilities for continuing professional development in general dentistry. Study participants felt that, in an online environment, mixing asynchronous and synchronous communication in a flipped classroom model facilitated learning in continuing professional development. Online active learning seems to work well in continuous professional development in general dentistry. After the course, the participating dental hygienists stated that they were able to use their new knowledge clinically and felt confident doing so.

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: , 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.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated oral health status in 60-year-old individuals over 12 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from The Swedish National Study on Aging and Care (SNAC). One hundred nineteen 60-year-old individuals (48% females) underwent a clinical and radiographic baseline examination (2001-2003) and follow-up examination in 2013-2015. For statistical analyses, paired t-tests and McNemar's test were performed. Statistical significance was determined at p < 0.05.

RESULTS: At the 12-year follow-up, the mean number of teeth and the proportion of individuals having ≥ 20 teeth decreased (p < 0.001). The mean number of teeth with buccal/lingual and approximal caries lesions increased (p < 0.029 and p < 0.031). Individuals with a distance from the cement-enamel junction to the bone of ≥ 5 mm increased in total (p < 0.002) and in males (p < 0.006). The prevalence of gingivitis increased in total (p < 0.001). The prevalence of periodontitis showed a significant increase in total (p < 0.043) and in females (p < 0.039).

CONCLUSION: The present study indicates that oral health status in 60-year-old individuals deteriorates over 12 years. However, the deteriorations were minor in terms of tooth loss, caries lesions, and changes in periodontal status.

Objective

To explore dental professionals’ perceptions of their role in the practice of oral health promotion.

Material and method

In-depth interviews were conducted with three dentists, one specialist dentist and seven dental hygienists. All were employed in the public dental service in Kalmar County, Sweden and had at least two years’ work experience. The interview questions addressed the experience and views of dental professionals with reference to their role in the practice of health promotion. The interview data were subjected to qualitative content analysis.

Results

Analysis revealed two themes which capture the essence of the dental professionals’ perception of their role in the practice of oral health promotion. One theme, having person-focused approach, comprised four categories: ‘considering the patient’s life situation’, ‘establishing a trusting relationship with patients’, ’strengthening patients’ commitment to oral health’ and ‘health education’. The other theme, perceiving social responsibility for oral health, comprised three categories: ‘dissemination of oral health knowledge’, ‘interprofessional collaboration’ and ‘equality in oral health care’.

Conclusion

Dental professionals perceived promotion of oral health to be an important aspect of their professional role. They aspired to patient participation in the decisionmaking process and educational activities, as well as practising and evaluating skills development. Although the dental professionals perceived that they undertook health promotion activities, they did not clearly distinguish between oral health promotion and disease prevention. There was intra- and interprofessional agreement among the dentists and dental hygienists with respect to expected outcomes for health promotion activities.

OBJECTIVE: The recommendations for the management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in oral surgery are inconsistent. The present review evaluated whether DOACs increase the risk of bleeding during oral surgery and postoperative complications.

STUDY DESIGN: The patients undergoing oral surgery and receiving a DOAC were compared with the patients receiving a DOAC different from the exposure, a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), or no anticoagulant. Three electronic databases were searched for eligible clinical trials and systematic reviews. The risk of bias was assessed, data were extracted, a meta-analysis was done, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations certainty-of-evidence ratings were determined.

RESULTS: Three clinical trials comparing patients receiving DOAC medication with patients on a VKA were eligible. A meta-analysis of bleeding 7 days postoperatively detected no significant differences between patients continuing DOAC or VKA medication during and after surgery. All of the point estimates favored uninterrupted DOAC over VKA therapy. Tranexamic acid was topically administered to some patients.

CONCLUSIONS: Based on an interpreted trend among 3 studies with mixed patient populations, the risk of bleeding during the first 7 postoperative days may be lower for patients on uninterrupted DOAC than VKA therapy (⨁⨁⭘⭘), but the effect size of the risk is unclear. 80 of 274 included patients experienced postoperative bleeding.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether Viridans Group Streptococcal Infective Endocarditis (VGS-IE) among individuals at high risk is more frequent following bacteraemia caused by invasive dental procedures (IDPs) than after daily bacteraemia caused by chewing and tooth brushing. The aim of this nested study was to assess if VGS-IE was temporally associated with IDPs in a national cohort of individuals at high risk.

METHODS: This nested case-control and case-crossover study was based on a Swedish national cohort study of 76,762 individuals at high risk of IE due to complex congenital heart disease, prosthetic heart valve or previous IE. Participants were living in Sweden between July 1st, 2008 and January 1st, 2018. The frequency of IDPs during the 3 months before VGS-IE was calculated and compared to controls (sampled 1:10). A case-crossover study was conducted to account for residual confounders. Participants were identified using the national patient register, and IDPs were identified using the national dental health register.

FINDINGS: 98,247 IDPs were carried out in the cohort during the study period: 624 occasions of oral surgery, 44,190 extractions and 53,433 sessions of subgingival scaling. The study could not confirm that IDPs were more common among cases (4.6%) than controls (4.1%), OR = 1.22 [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.64-2.3], or during case- (3.3%) than reference periods (3.8%), OR = 0.89 [95% CI: 0.68-1.17]. Restricting the analysis to the period when cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of IE in Swedish dentistry was recommended, from the 1st of October 2012 to the 1st of January 2018, did not alter the results of the case-control study: OR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.20-2.09, or the case-crossover study: OR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.15-2.19.

INTERPRETATION: The study could not confirm that VGS-IE is associated with IDPs among individuals at high risk. A study with larger sample size could clarify whether there is a lack of association. The finding of a small (<5%) proportion of cases temporally associated with IDPs is similar to that of the previous large-scale study on IDPs and VGS-IE.

FUNDING: Funding was provided by the Board of doctoral education at Karolinska Institutet, the Public Health Agency of Sweden, Folktandvården Stockholm AB, Steering Group for Collaborative Odontological Research at Karolinska Institutet and Stockholm City County, and the Swedish Dental Association.

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.

The findings of this cohort study suggest no increased incidence of oral streptococcal infective endocarditis among high-risk individuals in Sweden since the recommended cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis in dentistry for the prevention of endocarditis in October 2012. Background A few years after the publication of the British guidelines, national recommendations were published by the Swedish Medical Products Agency in October 2012, promoting the cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis in dentistry for the prevention of infective endocarditis (IE). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the incidence of oral streptococcal IE increased among high-risk individuals after October 2012. Methods This nationwide cohort study included all adult individuals (>17 years) living in Sweden from January 2008 to January 2018, with a diagnose code or surgical procedure code indicating high risk of IE. Cox proportional hazard models were performed to calculate adjusted ratios of oral streptococcal IE before and after October 2012 between high-risk individuals and references. Results This study found no increased incidence of oral streptococcal IE among high-risk individuals during the 5 years after the cessation, compared with before. Hazard rate ratios were 15.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.3-28.5) before and 20.7 (95% CI: 10.0-42.7) after October 2012 for prevalent high-risk individuals. Corresponding ratios for incident high-risk individuals were 66.8 (95% CI: 28.7-155.6) and 44.6 (95% CI: 22.9-86.9). Point estimates for interaction with time period were 1.4 (95% CI: .6-3.5) and 0.8 (95% CI: .5-1.3) for prevalent and incident high-risk individuals, respectively. Conclusion The results suggest that the current Swedish recommendation not to administer antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of IE in dentistry has not led to an increased incidence of oral streptococcal IE among high-risk individuals.