ArticleBMC oral health2025
Effect of preoperative antibiotic use on the implant success rate: a retrospective cohort study of cefixime and ornidazole in China.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Antibiotic prophylaxis during dental implant surgery treatment in northwest China: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to enhance the current clinical understanding of prophylactic antibiotic treatment in China before implant surgeries, and improve the experience and adherence of patients who undergo implant procedures.
methodsPatients eligible for inclusion in the past six years were divided into two groups of 500 patients each. Patients in the medication group received one 500 mg cefixime tablet and one 500 mg ornidazole tablet 0.5 hours before implantation. Patients in the non-medicated group did not receive any medicine. Patients were evaluated at two follow-ups: 7-14 days and 3-6 months after implant surgeries. The primary outcome was implant failure, which was characterized as implant detachment or complete loss during follow-ups, implant mobility (clinical mobility >1 mm) detected by surgeons when manually tightening abutments at the second follow-up (3-6 months after surgeries), or complications requiring clinical intervention occurred, including peri-implant bone resorption exceeding acceptable levels. Secondary outcomes were postoperative infection and adverse events. We statistically analyzed study outcomes using the Pearson Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and a multiple logistic regression model to evaluate differences between the two groups. P values less than 0.05 or 95% confidence intervals of relative risk or odds ratio values excluding one were considered statistically significant.
resultsWe noted implant failures (medication group: four patients, 0.8% and non-medicated group: three patients, 0.6%) and postoperative infections (medication group: 23 patients, 4.6% and non-medicated group: 25 patients, 5.0%) were no statistically significant difference between the two groups. However, adverse events showed a statistically significant increase in the medication group (medication group: 111 patients, 22.2% and non-medicated group: 21 patients, 4.2%), including nausea, vomiting, hypersomnia, dizziness, and diarrhea. There was a statistically non-significant increase in fever in the non-medicated group. No statistically significant evidence existed in preventing postoperative infection between the two groups across smoking status, age, implant system, number of implants (1, 2-3, and ≥4), sinus elevation surgery, implant placement, and guided bone regeneration surgery.
conclusionsAntibiotic prophylaxis using ornidazole in conjunction with cefixime in implant surgery may not have clinical benefits but significantly increases adverse events. Therefore, the necessity of prophylactic antibiotic use in healthy patients before implant surgeries needs to be reconsidered.
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.