SynthesisThe Journal of small animal practice2026
Infectious complications of dental procedures in dogs and cats, and the impact of antimicrobial prophylaxis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in The Journal of small animal practice, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify and describe available evidence pertaining to the local and systemic infectious complications in dogs and cats that have undergone dental procedures and the impact of peri-procedural antimicrobial prophylaxis. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic review was performed based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalysis guidelines.
resultsNo studies clearly reported the incidence of sepsis or infective endocarditis data associated with dental procedures. The pooled prevalence of post-dental procedure bacteraemia was 47% (95% confidence interval 23% to 74%). Two studies investigated both dogs undergoing dental procedures and controls. Neither showed a clear association of dental procedures and bacteraemia. Bacteraemia was not associated with any clinical consequences based on these data, but data were very limited, with a very low level of certainty of evidence. No studies evaluated the impact of peri-procedural antimicrobial on endocarditis, sepsis or other infectious complications. Two relevant studies that used bacteraemia as the outcome were identified. Both studies were deemed to have some concerns of bias. Certainty of evidence was deemed to be very low. No data were available to assess the impact of post-procedural antimicrobials on infectious complications. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The evidence base to assess the incidence and risks of infectious complications after dental procedures and impact of antimicrobial prophylaxis in dogs and cats is severely limited. This highlights a major research gap for a common patient population and hampers development of evidence-based guidelines for peri-procedural antimicrobial administration in dogs and cats.
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.