Routine Use Of Antibiotic Prophylaxis Research Articles

Perioperative Antibiotic Use of Dermatologic Surgeons in 2012

Recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis in dermatologic surgery have been established, but there is variability in perioperative antibiotic use of dermatologists. Authoritative guidelines have shifted away from routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis because there is no conclusive evidence that antibiotic use reduces risk of infective endocarditis or prosthetic joint infection. To determine current practices of perioperative antibiotic use of Mohs-trained surgeons and to compare patterns of use with updated administration guidelines. A survey was sent to American College of Mohs Surgery members in 2012. The main outcome measures were survey responses relating to demographic characteristics, experience with postoperative infection, familiarity with antibiotic guidelines, perioperative antibiotic practices, attitudes regarding antibiotic use, and antibiotic selection. Most survey respondents are familiar with the Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Dermatologic Surgery Advisory Statement 2008, but respondents give antibiotics for more indications than are recommended. Although not recommended, a high percentage reported giving antibiotics to patients at high risk of infective endocarditis or joint infection even when surgery does not breach oral mucosa or involve infected skin. Dermatologic surgeons overuse perioperative antibiotics for prevention of surgical site infection, infective endocarditis, and prosthetic joint infection based on current recommendations.

Surgical site infection prevention following total hip arthroplasty in Australia: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with substantial costs for health services, reduced quality of life, and functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies claiming to reduce the risk of SSI in hip arthroplasty in Australia. Baseline use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) was compared with no antibiotic prophylaxis (no AP), antibiotic-impregnated cement (AP + ABC), and laminar air operating rooms (AP + LOR). A Markov model was used to simulate long-term health and cost outcomes of a hypothetical cohort of 30,000 total hip arthroplasty patients from a health services perspective. Model parameters were informed by the best available evidence. Uncertainty was explored in probabilistic sensitivity and scenario analyses. Stopping the routine use of AP resulted in over Australian dollars (AUD) $1.5 million extra costs and a loss of 163 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Using antibiotic cement in addition to AP (AP + ABC) generated an extra 32 QALYs while saving over AUD $123,000. The use of laminar air operating rooms combined with routine AP (AP + LOR) resulted in an AUD $4.59 million cost increase and 127 QALYs lost compared with the baseline comparator. Preventing deep SSI with antibiotic prophylaxis and antibiotic-impregnated cement has shown to improve health outcomes among hospitalized patients, save lives, and enhance resource allocation. Based on this evidence, the use of laminar air operating rooms is not recommended.

Routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in low-risk laparoscopic cholecystectomy is unnecessary: A randomized clinical trial

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy uses smaller incision and trocars that lessen the contamination and exposure of wound, resulting in less infection. However, the antibiotic prophylaxis is still widely practiced, like in our institute, a continuation of the era of open surgery. Recent studies reveal no advantage of routine use of antibiotic, and there is growing consensus against it. Besides cost, antibiotic increases emergence of multidrug resistance. Because of the controversies, we conducted this clinical trial. This randomized clinical trial, conducted from October 1, 2009 to September 31, 2010 at Patan Hospital, included 154 patients in prophylactic antibiotic group (GrAP) with cefazolin 1 g IV as per existing practice and 156 in no antibiotic group (GrAPn). Symptomatic laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients of American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) 1 and 2 (without diabetes) were included. Patients with complicated gall stones (cholangitis, choledocholithiasis, and pancreatitis) and who required conversion were excluded. Wound was observed during follow-up within 1 week. Data on patient characteristics, use of antibiotic, bile spillage, and postoperative wound infection were entered in predesigned proforma. Microsoft Excel was used to analyze the data. In total, 310 patients were eligible for analysis, 154 in GrAP and 156 in GrAPn. Both groups were comparable in patient demographic and clinical characteristics such as average age (40.3 vs. 41.6 years) and sex (female 77.6% vs. 78.6%). Overall wound infection occurred in 4.8% (15/310). There was no significant difference in wound infections among the two groups (p = 0.442): GrAP 3.9% and GrAPn 5.8%. There was no mortality in this series. Routine preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is not necessary in low-risk symptomatic gallstone patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Medicinal leeches and the microsurgeon: A four‐year study, clinical series and risk benefit review

There are case reports and small series in the literature relating to the use of medicinal leeches by plastic surgeons; however, larger series from individual units are rare. The aim of this article is to present a comprehensive 4-year case series of the use of medicinal leeches, discuss the current evidence regarding indications, risks, and benefits and highlight the recent updates regarding leech speciation. Patients prescribed leeches in a 4-year period (July 2004-2008) were collated from hospital pharmacy records (N = 35). The number of leeches used, demographic, clinical, and microbiological details were retrospectively analyzed. Thirty-five patients were treated with leeches. The age range was 2 to 98 years (mean = 49.3). Leeches were most commonly used for venous congestion in pedicled flaps and replantations. Blood transfusions were necessary in 12 cases (34%) [mean = 2.8 units, range 2-5 units]. Our infection rate was 20% (7/35) including five infections with Aeromonas spp. (14.2%). The proportion of patients becoming infected after leech therapy was significantly greater in the group of patients that did not receive prophylactic antibiotic treatment (Fisher's Exact test P = 0.0005). In total, 14 cases (40%) were salvaged in entirety, in 7 cases 80% or more, in 2 cases 50 to 79%, and in 1 case less than 50% of the tissues were salvaged. In 11 cases (31%), the tissues were totally lost. Our study highlights both the benefits and the risks to patients in selected clinical situations and also the potential risks. The routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis is supported. In view of the emerging evidence that Hirudo verbana are now used as standard leech therapy, and the primary pathogen is Aeromonas veronii, until a large prospective multicenter study is published, large series of patients treated with leeches should be reported.

Prevention of infection after induced abortion: Release date October 2010 SFP Guideline 20102

One known complication of induced abortion is upper genital tract infection, which is relatively uncommon in the current era of safe, legal abortion. Currently, rates of upper genital tract infection in the setting of legal induced abortion in the United States are generally less than 1%. Randomized controlled trials support the use of prophylactic antibiotics for surgical abortion in the first trimester. For medical abortion, treatment-dose antibiotics may lower the risk of serious infection. However, the number-needed-to-treat is high. Consequently, the balance of risk and benefits warrants further investigation. Perioperative oral doxycycline given up to 12 h before a surgical abortion appears to effectively reduce infectious risk. Antibiotics that are continued after the procedure for extended durations meet the definition for a treatment regimen rather than a prophylactic regimen. Prophylactic efficacy of antibiotics begun after abortion has not been demonstrated in controlled trials. Thus, the current evidence supports pre-procedure but not post-procedure antibiotics for the purpose of prophylaxis. No controlled studies have examined the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for induced surgical abortion beyond 15 weeks of gestation. The risk of infection is not altered when an intrauterine device is inserted immediately post-procedure. The presence of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae or acute cervicitis carries a significant risk of upper genital tract infection; this risk is significantly reduced with antibiotic prophylaxis. Women with bacterial vaginosis (BV) also have an elevated risk of post-procedural infection as compared with women without BV; however, additional prophylactic antibiotics for women with known BV has not been shown to reduce their risk further than with use of typical pre-procedure antibiotic prophylaxis. Accordingly, evidence to support pre-procedure screening for BV is lacking. Neither povidone-iodine nor chlorhexidine have been shown to alter the risk of infection when used as cervicovaginal preparation. However, chlorhexidine appears to be more effective than povidone iodine at reducing bacteria within the vagina. The Society of Family Planning recommends the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis, preferably with doxycycline, before surgical abortion. Use of treatment doses of antibiotics with medical abortion may decrease the rare risk of serious infection but universal requirement for such treatment has not been established.

Rate of Infection After Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery and Effect of Antibiotic Prophylaxis

To determine the rate of postoperative wound infection and the association with prophylactic antibiotic use in uncomplicated carpal tunnel release surgery. We performed a multicenter, retrospective review of all the carpal tunnel release procedures performed between January 1, 2005, and August 30, 2007. Data reviewed included the use of prophylactic antibiotics, diabetic status, and the occurrence of postoperative wound infection. We determined the overall antibiotic usage rate and analyzed the correlation between antibiotic use and the development of postoperative wound infection. The rate of surgical site infections in the 3003 patients who underwent carpal tunnel release surgery (group A) was 11. Antibiotic usage data were available for 2336 patients (group B). Six patients without prophylactic antibiotics had infection, as did 5 patients with prophylactic antibiotics. This difference was not statistically significant. Of the 11 surgical site infections, 4 were deep (organ/space) and 7 superficial (incisional). The number of patients with diabetes in the overall study population was 546, 3 of whom had infections. This was not statistically different from the nondiabetic population infection rate (8 patients). The overall infection rate after carpal tunnel release surgery is low. In addition, the deep (organ/space) infection rate is much lower than previously reported. Antibiotic use did not decrease the risk of infection in this study population, including patients with diabetes. The routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in carpal tunnel release surgery is not indicated. Surgeons should carefully consider the risks and benefits of routinely using prophylactic antibiotics in carpal tunnel release surgery. Therapeutic III.

Prophylactic antibiotics in open mesh repair of inguinal hernia – A randomized controlled trial

The role of prophylactic antibiotics in mesh repair of inguinal hernia is unclear. A Cochrane meta-analysis in 2005 concluded that “antibiotic prophylaxis for elective inguinal hernia repair cannot be firmly recommended or discarded” and “further studies are needed, particularly on the use for mesh repair.” So, we designed a study to define the role of prophylactic antibiotics in mesh repair of inguinal hernia. We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, trial comparing wound infection rates in 450 patients (225 received intravenous Cefazolin, 225 received a placebo) undergoing primary inguinal hernia repair electively using polypropylene mesh. 334 patients who completed a followup period of one month were analyzed. Age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, type of hernia, type of anesthesia, grade of surgeon, pre and postoperative hospital stay and duration of operation were recorded. CDC criteria was used to define wound infection. Groups were well matched for all preoperative variables studied. The overall infection rate was 8.7% (29 out of 334). The incidence of wound infection in antibiotic group was 7% and 10.5% in control group. One from each group developed deep surgical site infection. Most of the infections occurred between the 7th and 12th post-operative day after discharge from the hospital. Antibiotic prophylaxis was associated with decreased incidence of wound infection when compared to control group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Based on our results we do not recommend the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective mesh repair of inguinal hernias.

Prophylaxis of infective endocarditis: Current perspectives

Infective endocarditis mainly affects the proximal surfaces of the heart valves but may affect the distal surface of the valve leaflets, subvalvular apparatus, congenital heart defects, walls of the heart chambers damaged by the impact of abnormal jets, prosthetic tissue placed in the heart, and attachments of implanted shunts, conduits, fistulae, or pacing wires. The occurrence of endocarditis is almost always preceded by a transient bacteremia. The transient bacteremia can be caused by dental procedures, lacerations of the skin and mucous membranes, and insertion of septic needles or catheters in the blood stream. However, the most common causes of transient bacteremia are daily routine activities, such as brushing teeth and chewing food. Therefore, the chances of developing infective endocarditis are higher with routine daily activities than with dental procedures or other manipulations, such as gastrointestinal or genitourinary procedures. In a few cases infective endocarditis is caused by dental procedures or by other diagnostic and therapeutic manipulation [1]. Furthermore, chances of developing infective endocarditic after such procedures not covered by antibiotic prophylaxis are low even in individuals with predisposing conditions. Also, the protection provided by antibiotic prophylaxis is not complete. The cumulative risk of wide use of such antibiotic prophylaxis is more than the benefit, even if the prophylaxis is completely effective [2]. Therefore, routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis before oral, dental, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary procedures is not recommended in a wide variety of underlying cardiac conditions. Thus, the best way to prevent bacterial endocarditis is by

The role of antibiotic prophylaxis in mesh repair of primary inguinal hernias using prolene hernia system: a randomized prospective double-blind control trial

Antibiotic prophylaxis is being commonly used in mesh repair of inguinal hernia but its role has been questioned in a recent Cochrane analysis performed in 2003. Routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in mesh repair of inguinal hernia can lead to bacterial resistance and increase in cost. In a present double-blind placebo controlled trial involving 120 patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair using prolene hernia system, we did not find any benefit of the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in terms of wound infection rate.

Randomized Controlled Trials of Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Severe Acute Pancreatitis: Relationship between Methodological Quality and Outcome

Aim: To evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis in relation to outcome. Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for RCTs that studied the effectiveness of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis. A meta-analysis was performed with a random effects model. Methodological quality was quantified by a previously published scoring system (range 0–17 points). Results: Six studies, with a total of 397 participants, obtained a methodological score of at least 5 points and were included. Systemic antibiotic prophylaxis had no significant effect on infection of pancreatic necrosis (absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.055; 95% Cl -0.084 to 0.194) and mortality (ARR 0.058, 95% Cl -0.017 to 0.134). Spearman correlation showed an inverse association between methodological quality and ARR for mortality (correlation coefficient -0.841, p = 0.036). Conclusions: The inverse relationship between methodological quality and impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on mortality emphasizes the importance of high-quality RCTs. At present, adequate evidence for the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis is lacking.

Prophylactic antibiotics and surgery for primary clefts

There are currently no evidence-based guidelines about the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in repair of cleft lip and palate. After the designation of regional cleft centres in the UK, a postal questionnaire was sent to cleft surgeons in 2004 to enquire about the use of routine antibiotic prophylaxis for primary repair of cleft lip and palate. The results showed a lack of consensus and wide disparity among centres. The findings show that there is a need for a random control clinical trial to establish national recommendations for the rational use of prophylactic antibiotics in primary cleft surgery.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in chemotherapy‐induced neutropenia: time to reconsider

The use of antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic patients remains controversial. The main arguments against prophylaxis are the lack of survival benefit and the risk of inducing antibiotic resistance. At present, clinical guidelines advise against routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis and current practice is to commence broad-spectrum antibiotics at the onset of fever in the neutropenic patient. However hospitalization, investigations and treatment all impact on resources as well as affecting patient quality of life, often resulting in chemotherapy delays and dose reductions. The benefits of prophylactic antibiotics have been emphasized by two major double-blind, placebo controlled trials with levofloxacin with very significant reductions in all infection-related events. Furthermore, the meta-analysis confirms a survival advantage and this is greatest with the use of fluoroquinolones. These benefits must be weighed against the problem of emerging antibiotic resistance. It has been shown that antibiotic prophylaxis does induce resistant organisms, but some studies have shown that the impact on clinical outcomes may not be as great as expected. Current evidence supports antibiotic prophylaxis with fluoroquinolones in acute leukaemia and high-dose chemotherapy patients, commencing at the same time as chemotherapy. Febrile episodes are much commoner with the first cycle in patients with solid tumours or lymphoma having moderately myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and these patients should be offered prophylaxis for at least the first cycle of chemotherapy. Further work is ongoing to facilitate the selection of patients with the greatest chance of benefit so that prophylaxis can be used efficiently.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis for gastrointestinal procedures: current practices in North American academic pediatric programs.

Guidelines for the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in children are based on a small number of studies that assess the risk of infection associated with performing endoscopic procedures. The American Heart Association (AHA) and the American Society of Gastroenterological Endoscopy (ASGE) have established guidelines that identify conditions and procedures that place a child at greater risk for infectious complications. Because data on bacteremia and sepsis associated with endoscopy in children are very limited, we reviewed the practices of 15 large academic pediatric gastroenterology services to see if patterns of practice and safety could be determined. A questionnaire was sent to 15 academic gastroenterology centers in the United States and Canada asking about antibiotic prophylaxis for endoscopic procedures for children with six conditions. These included three conditions related to congenital heart disease based on negligible, moderate, and high risk for endocarditis; immune compromise; the presence of a central venous line; and the presence of a ventriculo-peritoneal shunt. Six procedures were evaluated, including esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy, flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy with biopsy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, esophageal sclerotherapy, esophageal dilation, and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. The patterns of reported practice generally conform to the AHA and ASGE guidelines. The six conditions and six procedures yielded 36 response categories for the participating centers. The majority of centers reported routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in about half (17) of the response categories, which represented three distinct situations. These included children with congenital heart disease having moderate or high risk for bacterial endocarditis for almost all procedure categories and children undergoing PEG tube placement regardless of underlying condition. In all other combinations of underlying conditions and procedures, the majority of centers did not use routine prophylaxis. The majority of centers did not use antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiac conditions with a negligible risk of infectious complication or for children with immunocompromise, central venous lines, or ventriculo-peritoneal shunts for any procedure except PEG placement. These results indicate that the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis is limited in pediatric academic centers to a few very specific conditions and procedures. The results also provide indirect evidence that the risk of infectious complications associated with endoscopic procedures appears to be exceedingly low.

Aeromonas Infection After Medicinal Leech Therapy: Case Reports and Review of the Literature

Aeromonas Infection After Medicinal Leech Therapy: Case Reports and Review of the Literature

The routine use of cefazolin in cesarean section

Objective: To determine the effectiveness and safety of the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in women undergoing cesarean section. Method: Four hundred and forty-one women undergoing cesarean sections were randomly assigned either to a single dose of 1 g intravenous cefazolin or placebo after clamping of the umbilical cord. The primary outcome was the development of post-operative febrile morbidity and the secondary outcomes were infection-related complications. Result: There were 211 emergency and 230 elective cesarean sections. In the emergency cesarean sections, 34 (30.6%) women developed post-operative febrile morbidity in the placebo group compared to 11 (11%) women in the cefazolin group. This was a statistically significant difference ( P=0.001). Similarly, there were statistically significant differences between the two groups in the development of wound infection ( P<0.001), use of therapeutic antibiotics ( P=0.001), and post-operative days in hospital ( P=0.003). No statistically significant differences were detected in the development of other infection-related complications. In the elective cesarean sections, no statistically significant differences were found in post-operative febrile morbidity and infection-related complications. There were no serious side effects related to the use of cefazolin. Conclusion: The routine use of a single dose of cefazolin is safe and effective in emergency but not elective cesarean section.

The Need for Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

The need for antibiotic treatment when performing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy may not be as important as it is thought. This study assesses the real efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy with respect to the postoperative infection rate. A prospective randomized study on the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. University teaching hospital, La Sapienza, Italy. Eighty-four patients randomly placed into 2 groups (A [n = 44] and B [n = 40]) immediately before undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Before anesthesia was administered, group A received intravenously 2 g of cefotaxime sodium diluted in 100 mL of isotonic sodium chloride solution; group B, 10 mL of isotonic sodium chloride solution in 100 mL of saline. A gallbladder bile sample for culture was withdrawn intraoperatively from all patients. In both groups, age, sex, weight, duration of surgery, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists patient classification score, preoperative autologous blood donation, antibiotic administration, intraoperative gallbladder rupture, findings from bile culture positive for bacteria, episodes of colic within 30 days before surgery, length of postoperative hospital stay, and number of septic complications were recorded. All data were correlated by univariate and multivariate analyses with the onset of septic phenomena. In group A, 3 cases of wound infection, 1 case of subhepatic abscess from bile leakage, and 1 case of urinary tract infection were observed; group B, 4 cases of wound infection, 1 case of bronchopneumonia, and 2 cases of urinary tract infection. Comparison of data showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. Findings from bile examination in patients with sepsis complications were positive in 5 patients in group A and in 6 in group B (P = .91). Multivariate analysis showed diabetes mellitus and colic episodes within 30 days before surgery as independent factors significantly associated to the onset of infectious complications. In elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, antibiotic treatment did not seem to affect the incidence and severity of infections or the degree of bile contamination.

Meta-analysis of antibiotic prophylaxis in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

Considerable controversy exists regarding the role of antibiotic prophylaxis prior to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), in that various studies of antibiotic prophylaxis have reached conflicting conclusions. The aim of this meta-analysis is to synthesize the data in order to determine whether antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the rate of occurrence of bacteremia and/or the rate of sepsis/cholangitis among patients undergoing ERCP. Clinical trials were selected via Medline and Pubmed using subject words and textwords "ERCP", "antibiotic" and "antibiotic prophylaxis". Summary estimates of the risk ratios for the outcomes of bacteremia and sepsis/cholangitis were calculated. After 49 abstracts had been reviewed, seven randomized placebo-controlled trials of antibiotic prophylaxis prior to ERCP were identified. Upon further review, two studies were excluded because patients received antibiotics before and after the ERCP. Four studies reported on the clinical outcome of bacteremia. Five studies reported on the clinical outcome of sepsis/cholangitis. The summary relative risk of the association between antibiotic prophylaxis and bacteremia was 0.39 (95% CI, 0.12-1.29). For sepsis/cholangitis the summary relative risk was 0.91 (95 % CI, 0.39-2.15). Antibiotic prophylaxis prior to ERCP may reduce the incidence of bacteremia but this has little clinical relevance. Prophylaxis does not substantially reduce the incidence of sepsis/cholangitis and thus the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis cannot be recommended.

Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of Lyme disease.

To determine if antibiotic prophylaxis following a dear tick bite is effective in reducing the risk of developing Lyme disease. Meta-analysis of published trials. Clinical trials were identified by a computerised literature search of MEDLINE and by an assessment of the bibliographies of published studies. Trials were included in the analysis if their patients were randomly allocated to a treatment or control group, enrolled within 72 hours following an Ixodes tick bite, and had no clinical evidence of Lyme disease at enrollment. Three trials were selected for review after inclusion criteria were applied. Data were extracted for details of study design, patient characteristics, interventions, duration of therapy, and number of adverse events in each arm of therapy. Among the 600 patients with Ixodes tick bites, the rate of infection in the placebo group was 1.4%. In contrast, patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis had a 0% infection rate. The pooled odds ratio, comparing prophylaxis to placebo, was 0.0 (95% confidence interval 0.0, 1.5) (p = .12). The available evidence to date suggests that the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of Lyme disease remains uncertain. Meta-analysis of the controlled trials failed to establish definitive treatment efficacy owing to the small sample size of the combined trials and the low rates of infection following a deer tick bite. A larger randomized trial is needed to demonstrate definitively that prophylaxis is more effective than placebo in reducing the risk of early Lyme disease in endemic areas.

Prophylactic antibiotics for third molar surgery: A dissenting opinion

The use of antibiotic therapy is well established in the treatment of identified infections caused by susceptible microorganisms, and for prophylaxis in cleancontaminated or contaminated surgery, in the prevention of subacute bacterial endocarditis after intraoral procedures, in patients after total joint implantation, and in the prevention of infection in the immunocompromised patient. However, although third molar surgery may usually be considered clean-contaminated and occasionally contaminated surgery, the use of routine antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing such surgery is a controversial topic. It is common practice in oral and maxillofacial surgery to use antibiotics after third molar surgery. In some offices it is a universal practice to prescribe them for all patients having routine removal of impacted third molars. A recent study in Great Britain indicated more than three quarters of the oral and maxillofacial surgeons prescribed antibiotics routinely for patients in such cases. However, the timing and protocol of antibiotic use varied widely.1 Another recent study indicated that general practitioners also use antibiotics after third molar surgery, but they did so at a much lower rate. 2 The purpose of this article is to review the literature regarding the appropriateness of the routine use of antibiotics for third molar surgery.