ReviewNational journal of maxillofacial surgery
Systemic complications of use of antibiotics following removal of the third molar: A systematic review.
Review in National journal of maxillofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Effect of pre-treatment systemic antibiotics on post-operative pain following single-visit root canal therapy in vital mandibular first premolars: A randomized controlled trial.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Influence of Amoxicillin Dosage and Time of Administration on Postoperative Complications After Impacted Third Molar Surgery: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Clinical Trial.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are currently conflicting views on the value of using antimicrobial prophylaxis in dental procedures, including extractions and implants. This review intended to highlight the common use and misuse of antibiotic treatment regimens in a dental setting, particularly in third molar surgery. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this study has been reported accordingly. The purpose of the present systematic review was to evaluate the use of antibiotics during therapeutic orthodontic treatment involving third molar extractions, with the aim of reducing the likelihood of postoperative complications. The systematic review was conducted using online databases such as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and Scopus. A set of inclusion and exclusion criteria was applied, focusing on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated antibiotic treatment for third molar surgery and were published up to 2021. The total 20 RCTs were included. The findings indicated that amoxicillin, both with and without clavulanic acid, was frequently used as an antibacterial agent in various doses and durations. However, there were no statistically significant differences in postoperative complication rates between the treatment groups. There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend standard antibiotic prophylaxis for healthy young individuals undergoing third molar extraction surgery. Additionally, antibiotic-related adverse events were not statistically different from those observed in placebo groups. Based on our findings, the risk of allergic reactions and the potential for developing antimicrobial resistance necessitate a careful and judicious use of antibiotics in mandibular third molar extraction procedures, even if cost is not a limiting factor.
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.