ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2024
Antibiotics as adjunct to non-surgical periodontal therapy in diabetic patients.
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
data sourcesA comprehensive literature search was performed via MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, including all relevant publications accessed on March 2023 and subsequently updated up to July 2024. Additionally, grey literature was searched, and there was no restriction on publication data and languages. STUDY SELECTION: All randomized clinical trials comparing topical/systemic antibiotics as an adjunct to scaling and root planning (SRP) with SRP alone for the treatment of diabetic patients with periodontitis were included. Literature reviews, case reports and series, preclinical studies or studies lacking periodontal data were excluded. Clinical attachment level was considered as the primary outcome. Bleeding on probing, pocket depth, and gingival index were the secondary outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool, and for each domain, bias risk was judged as low, unclear and high risk of bias. Selection, removing duplicates, screening, extracting data, and assessing the quality of studies were done by two investigators and findings were tabulated. Meta-analysis was conducted, generating forest plots to compare different treatment modalities, time periods, and antibiotic types. Key periodontal parameters such as probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), plaque index (PI), and bleeding on probing (BoP) were analysed.
resultsUpon screening and further evaluation of 690 articles, 43 were considered for full-text eligibility. Finally, 30 studies were included in the systematic review, and 27 were included in meta-analysis. Out of 30 randomized clinical trials, 9 studies focused on topical and antibiotics, and 21 involved systemic administration of antibiotics. Five of the nine studies focussing on topical administration of antibiotics, were classified as having a low risk of bias and four as having a high risk of bias. Out of 21 studies on systemic antibiotics, eight were classified as having a low risk of bias, two were undefined, and eleven showed a high risk of bias. Authors concluded that adjunctive use of antibiotics could lead to improvement in periodontal clinical parameters
conclusionThe findings showed that the adjunctive use of antibiotics led to slight improvements in clinical outcomes. However, keeping in mind antibiotic resistance, and side effects of antibiotics, their use should be approached cautiously and only when necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39543400What 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.