PurposeProphylactic 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.MethodsThis 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.Results103 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.ConclusionsThe 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.Graphical
Read full abstract