Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Complex systematic review: Perioperative antibiotics in conjunction with dental implant placement
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2597-1025
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, ISSN 0905-7161, E-ISSN 1600-0501, Vol. 26, no Suppl 11, p. 1-14Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to revisit the available scientific literature regarding perioperative antibiotics in conjunction with implant placement by combining the recommended methods for systematic reviews and complex systematic reviews. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search of Medline (OVID), The Cochrane Library (Wiley), EMBASE, PubMed and Health technology assessment (HTA) organizations was performed, in addition to a complementary hand-search. Selected systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed using GRADE and AMSTAR, respectively. A meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: The literature search identified 846 papers of which 10 primary studies and seven systematic reviews were included. Quality assessment of the systematic reviews revealed two studies of moderate risk of bias and five with high risk of bias. The two systematic reviews of moderate risk of bias stated divergent numbers needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one patient from implant failure. Four of the primary studies comparing antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo were estimated to be of low, or moderate, risk of bias and subjected to meta-analysis. The NNT was 50 (pooled RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18, 0.84; P = 0.02). None of these four studies individually show a statistical significant benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis. Furthermore, narrative analysis of the studies eligible for meta-analysis reveals clinical heterogeneity regarding intervention and smoking. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic prophylaxis in conjunction with implant placement reduced the risk for implant loss by 2%. However, the sub-analysis of the primary studies suggests that there is no benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis in uncomplicated implant surgery in healthy patient.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2015. Vol. 26, no Suppl 11, p. 1-14
Keywords [en]
antibiotic prophylaxis, complex systematic review, dental implant surgery, knowledge gap, systematic review
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-940DOI: 10.1111/clr.12637ISI: 000369955400002PubMedID: 26080862Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84941933150Local ID: 23976OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-940DiVA, id: diva2:1397621
Conference
Consensus Conference of the European Association for Osseointegration (EAO), Pfäffikon, Schwyz, Switzerland (2015)
Available from: 2020-02-27 Created: 2020-02-27 Last updated: 2024-02-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopushttp://rdcu.be/Be2E/

Authority records

Tranæus, SofiaKlinge, Björn

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Tranæus, SofiaKlinge, Björn
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 53 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf