Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2011
Comparative efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin and clindamycin in the treatment of odontogenic abscesses and inflammatory infiltrates: a phase II, double-blind, randomized trial.
Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibiotic resistance in odontogenic infections: A systematic review of current evidence and implications for guideline-based therapy.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of latest evidence for antibiotic prophylaxis and therapy in oral and maxillofacial surgery.Infection · 2019Pooled it
- Modified minimally invasive surgical technique with clindamycin-augmented or non-augmented platelet-rich fibrin in periodontal regeneration: A randomized clinical trial.Journal of periodontal research · 2025Trial
- Microbiological analysis of a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial comparing moxifloxacin and clindamycin in the treatment of odontogenic infiltrates and abscesses.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2012Trial
- Risk factors for abscess formation during or following endodontic treatment in an outpatient setting.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Optimal Duration of Antibiotic Therapy for Space Infections in the Maxillofacial Region: A Systematic Review.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2025Review
- Rising incidence of severe maxillofacial space infections in Germany.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- The Effectiveness of a Bioactive Healing Abutment as a Local Drug Delivery System to Impact Peri-Implant Mucositis: A Prospective Case Series Study.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Sonication versus the conventional method for evaluation of the dental microbiome: a prospective pilot study.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Bisphosphonates in dentistry: Historical perspectives, adverse effects, and novel applications.Bone · 2021Article
- Is the penetration of clindamycin into the masseter muscle really enough to treat odontogenic infections?Clinical oral investigations · 2021Article
- Oral Antibiotic for Empirical Management of Acute Dentoalveolar Infections-A Systematic Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Calculated initial parenteral treatment of bacterial infections: Skin and soft tissue infections.GMS infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Calculated parenteral initial treatment of bacterial infections: Infections in the ear, nose, throat and mouth and jaw area.GMS infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the oral health-related quality of life in patients with odontogenic fascial space abscesses and underlying conditions - a prospective questionnaire-based study.Head & face medicine · 2019Article
- Assessment of Severity of Illness and Monitoring Response to Treatment of Odontogenic Space Infection Using Serum Prealbumin.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2019Article
- Moxifloxacin versus Clindamycin/Ceftriaxone in the management of odontogenic maxillofacial infectious processes: A preliminary, intrahospital, controlled clinical trial.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2015Article
- Phenotype, genotype, and antibiotic susceptibility of Swedish and Thai oral isolates of Staphylococcus aureus.Journal of oral microbiology · 2015Article
- Dental abscess: A microbiological review.Dental research journal · 2013Review
- Microbiology and treatment of acute apical abscesses.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Moxifloxacin penetrates well into oromaxillary tissue and covers the causative pathogens that show an increasing resistance to standard antibiotics. Clinical reports suggest that moxifloxacin may be effective for the treatment of odontogenic infections that can lead to serious complications. The objective of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study was to compare the efficacies and safeties of moxifloxacin and clindamycin for the medical treatment of patients with gingival inflammatory infiltrates and as an adjuvant therapy for patients with odontogenic abscesses requiring surgical treatment. Patients received either 400 mg moxifloxacin per os once daily or 300 mg clindamycin per os four times daily for 5 days consecutively. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percent reduction in patients' perceived pain on a visual analogue scale at days 2 to 3 from baseline. Primary analysis included 21 moxifloxacin- and 19 clindamycin-treated patients with infiltrates and 15 moxifloxacin- and 16 clindamycin-treated patients with abscesses. The mean pain reductions were 61.0% (standard deviation [SD], 46.9%) with moxifloxacin versus 23.4% (SD, 32.1%) with clindamycin (P = 0.006) for patients with infiltrates and 55.8% (SD, 24.8%) with moxifloxacin versus 42.7% (SD, 48.5%) with clindamycin (P = 0.358) for patients with abscesses. A global efficacy assessment at days 2 to 3 and 5 to 7 showed faster clinical responses with moxifloxacin in both abscess and infiltrate patients. Rates of adverse events were lower in moxifloxacin- than in clindamycin-treated patients. In patients with inflammatory infiltrates, moxifloxacin was significantly more effective in reducing pain at days 2 to 3 of therapy than clindamycin. No significant differences between groups were found for patients with odontogenic abscesses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.