ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2026
Third‑molar extraction: do antibiotics really prevent postoperative infection?
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 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
a commentary onRaiesian S, Ahmadiyeh ADP, Rad MM. A systematic review on prior/postoperative antibiotic therapy efficiency in reducing surgical complications after third molar extraction surgery. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2025;24(5):1427-1433 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-024-02355-6 .
designSystematic review conducted in accordance with PRISMA recommendations, aimed at evaluating the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotic therapy in reducing postoperative complications following third molar extraction. CASE SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials and prospective and retrospective studies published between 2000 and 2021 were included, involving patients undergoing surgical removal of third molars. Selected studies evaluated different antibiotic protocols administered pre- and postoperatively. DATA ANALYSIS: Eighteen English-language studies were selected from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed between patients undergoing prophylactic antibiotic therapy and control groups regarding main clinical outcomes, including postoperative pain and swelling in simple third molar extractions. Findings also highlight growing concern regarding microbial resistance, adverse drug effects, and costs associated with the indiscriminate use of antibiotics.
conclusionsRoutine antibiotic administration, both pre- and postoperatively in third molar surgery, demonstrated no relevant clinical benefit in systemically healthy patients.
Identifiers
42827102What 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.