ReviewJournal of maxillofacial and oral surgery2025
A Systematic Review on Prior/Postoperative Antibiotics Therapy Efficiency in Reducing Surgical Complications After Third Molar Extraction Surgery.
Review in Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 2025. 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.
- Using injectable Platelet-Rich fibrin to improve recovery after impacted lower third molar extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- Third‑molar extraction: do antibiotics really prevent postoperative infection?Evidence-based dentistry · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: One of the most common dental surgeries is third molar extraction which often leads to pain and swelling after surgery. In recent years, the prophylactic antibiotics before or after surgeries have been used to reduce the risk of injuries and infection. Various researches conducted in this field have yielded contradictory results. The aim of prophylactic antibiotic treatment is to prevent possible infections and complications after surgery, while antibiotic prescription after surgeries reduces clinical symptoms such as pain. The aim of the present review study is to determine and compare the effect of antibiotic drugs before and after third molar extraction in order to reducing surgical complications. Material and Methods: The research was conducted using electronic databases provided by PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar, with applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. Accordingly, all the clinical trials published since 2000 focused on the antibiotic treatments in third molar extraction surgery were included in this review. Results: The obtained results from 18 selected studies demonstrated that there is no statistically significant document to confirm the efficacy of antibiotics to prevent post-surgery complications such as swelling and pain after third molar extraction. Conclusion: Dentists should carefully consider the potential increase in bacteria's resistance to antibiotics and the possibility of side effects when prescribing them. This is because in some cases, the disadvantages may outweigh the benefits for the patient.
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.