Antibiotic resistance in periodontitis patients: A systematic scoping review of randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to evaluate the prevalence and proportions of antibiotic-resistant species in periodontitis patients. METHODS: A systematic scoping review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted using the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews involving different databases. MeSH terms and keywords were provided to examine only RCTs with antibiotic-resistant results that included at least 3 months of follow-up of systematically healthy patients diagnosed with periodontitis and treated with systemic or local antibiotics adjunctive to subgingival debridement. RCTs that managed participants surgically, duplicate publications, and investigations implemented on animals were discarded. RESULTS: Six RCTs were chosen. These studies included 465 patients. Most investigations observed that while Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Tannerella forsythia, and Porphyromonas gingivalis had low resistance to amoxicillin, microorganisms in many sites showed resistance to tetracycline, metronidazole, and azithromycin pretreatment. A. actinomycetemcomitans showed high resistance to tetracycline pre- and post-therapy. The proportion of antibiotic-resistant samples augmented rapidly after the prescription of antibiotics in all test groups. The percentage of antibiotic-resistant microorganisms decreased over time; at the end of the follow-up period, resistance levels were close to baseline levels. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive local and systemic antibiotic treatment temporarily increased the antibiotic resistance of subgingival microorganisms; nonetheless, many bacteria remained susceptible to antibiotics during their administration.

Bacterial resistance to antiseptics used in dentistry: A systematic scoping review of randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevalence and proportions of bacteria resistant to antiseptics used in dentistry. METHODS: A review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews involving different databases. MeSH terms and keywords were provided to examine only RCTs with antiseptic-resistant results. RESULTS: Five RCTs were included. These investigations analysed 442 patients. Concerning the prevalence and proportion of species resistant to antiseptics, it was found that the chlorhexidine group showed a statistically significant increase in Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus counts indicating bacterial resistance (p < 0.001). Moreover, Veillonella species showed resistance to triclosan at the commencement and during the RCTs, and a slight increase in the proportion of resistant strains was observed. Porphyromonas gingivalis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa did not show resistance to cetylpyridinium chloride. Similarly, it was no observed resistance to medicinal herbal plant formulations. CONCLUSIONS: Resistance of S. mutans and L. acidophilus to chlorhexidine was observed, this resistance increased during the follow-up period. Similarly, although in a slight proportion, an increase in the resistance of Veillonella spp. to triclosan during the study period was also described. No microorganisms resistance was observed to any of the other antiseptics studied.

Antimicrobial resistance in patients with endodontic infections: A systematic scoping review of observational studies.

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and proportions of antimicrobial-resistant species in patients with endodontic infections. A systematic scoping review of scientific evidence was accomplished involving different databases. Nine investigations were selected including 651 patients. Enterococcus faecalis was resistant to tetracycline (30%-70%), clindamycin (100%), erythromycin (10%-20%), ampicillin (9%) and azithromycin (60%). On the contrary, Prevotella spp., Fusobacterium spp., Peptostreptococcus spp. and Streptococcus spp. were resistant to penicillin, tetracycline, doxycycline, ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, metronidazole and clindamycin in different proportions. Fusobacterium nucleatum showed high resistance to amoxicillin, amoxicillin plus clavulanate and erythromycin. Prevotella oralis presented a predisposition to augment its resistance to clindamycin over time. Tanerella forsythia exhibited resistance to ciprofloxacin and rifampicin. Lactococcus lactis presented robust resistance to cephalosporins, metronidazole, penicillin, amoxicillin and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. It was observed high levels of resistance to antimicrobials that have been utilised in the local and systemic treatment of oral cavity infections.

Microbial resistance to oral antiseptics used in hospitalized patients: A systematic scoping review of randomized clinical trials.

AIMS: To evaluate the prevalence and proportions of bacteria resistant to oral antiseptics used in hospitalized patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was led by implementing the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews including various databases. MeSH terms and keywords were used to assess only RCTs with antiseptic-resistant outcomes. Fourth RCTs met the selection criteria. These trials studied 399 hospitalized patients for respiratory infections or cardiovascular disease. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter baumannii were predominant pathogens in the chlorhexidine group. It was found that Veillonella parvula and Campylobacter gracilis (57% of the isolates) had resistance to triclosan, while 67% of Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter, and Enterobacter species presented resistance to chlorhexidine. However, an increase in minimal inhibitory concentrations of triclosan or chlorhexidine during the follow-up period was not observed. Moreover, chlorhexidine reduced the amount of S. aureus in dental plaque and the oropharyngeal colonization by aerobic microorganisms; nonetheless, it was unsatisfactory to decrease the occurrence of respiratory infections. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Resistance of V. parvula and C. gracilis to triclosan, and Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter, and Enterobacter species to chlorhexidine were perceived. However, these resistances did not increase during the follow-up period.

Antimicrobial resistance in patients with odontogenic infections: A systematic scoping review of prospective and experimental studies.

Background: Patients with odontogenic infections are commonly prescribed antimicrobials on an experiential base without knowing the precise microorganisms implicated. The aim of this systematic scoping review is to evaluate the prevalence and proportions of antimicrobial-resistant species in patients with odontogenic infections. Material and Methods: A systematic scoping review of scientific evidence was accomplished involving different databases. Results: Eight randomized clinical trials and 13 prospective observational studies were included. These investigations analyzed 1506 patients. The species that showed higher levels of resistance included aerobic and facultative anaerobe such as Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus viridans, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Streptococcus milleri, Enterococcus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Proteus mirabilis, and Staphylococcus coagulases-negative. In obligate anaerobes sampled were Peptostreptococcos spp., Bacteroides spp., and Prevotella spp. Staphylococcus showed resistance to ampicillin, piperacillin, clindamycin, amoxicillin, metronidazole, and penicillin. Streptococcus had resistance to metronidazole, clindamycin, doxycycline, penicillin, and amoxicillin. Peptostreptococcus spp. presented resistance to penicillin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, and cefalexin. Gram-negative microorganisms had resistance to tetracycline, ciprofloxacin, azithromycin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, and penicillin. Bacteroides spp. exhibited resistance to penicillin, erythromycin, and gentamicin. Prevotella spp. showed resistance to penicillin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, clindamycin, levofloxacin, and imipenem. Finally, Klebsiella spp. displayed resistance to ampicillin, amoxicillin, moxifloxacin, and cefalexin. Interestingly, one clinical trial showed that after therapy there was a reduction in sensitivity of 18% for azithromycin and 26% for spiramycin. Conclusions: Most of the microorganisms had resistance to diverse groups of antimicrobials. Suitable antimicrobials must be prescribed founded on the microbial samples, culture susceptibility, and clinical progression of the odontogenic infection. Furthermore, it was observed high levels of resistance to antimicrobials that have been used in local and systemic therapy of oral cavity infections. A preponderance of anaerobic microorganisms over aerobic ones was observed. Key words:Antibiotic resistance, odontogenic infections, efficacy, microorganisms, scoping review.

Clinical and Microbiological Efficacy of Adjunctive Systemic Quinolones to Mechanical Therapy in Periodontitis: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Objectives: To assess the clinical and microbiological efficacy of systemic quinolones adjunctive to mechanical therapy in periodontitis patients. Materials and Methods. A systematic review of the scientific literature was carried out. The search scheme comprised the Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, SCIELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online), and LILACS (Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud) databases, together with the gray literature. MeSH terms and keywords were utilized to explore publications in all idioms. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that met the selection criteria were included. Results: A total of 4 RCTs were selected. These RCTs found superior clinical and microbiological efficacy of adjunctive systemic moxifloxacin (MOX) and levofloxacin (LV) compared to subgingival debridement plus placebo. Improvements in PD and CAL were 2.4 ± 0.8 mm and 2.7 ± 0.9 mm for LV, and 1.5 ± 0.5 mm and 1.8 ± 0.5 mm for MOX, respectively. After six months of follow-up, adjunctive MOX reduced the presence of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans to imperceptible levels, while LV markedly reduced this microorganism. Some adverse events were reported in the LV group and none in the MOX group. Conclusions: Adjunctive MOX and LV improve probing depth and clinical attachment level compared with subgingival debridement alone in patients with periodontitis. The efficacy of these quinolones against A. actinomycetemcomitans was also superior.

A multilevel analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing adjunctive moxifloxacin versus amoxicillin/metronidazole for the treatment of aggressive periodontitis.

BACKGROUND: It was documented that the clinical outcomes of mechanical periodontal treatment can fluctuate not merely concerning patients but equally among various tooth sites in the subject. This trial evaluates the clinical parameters related with the patient, tooth, and site that generate more changes in clinical attachment level (CAL) gain and probing depth (PD) reduction, using moxifloxacin (MOX) versus amoxicillin plus metronidazole (AMOX + ME) as adjuncts to scaling and root planing (SRP), in comparison to SRP only, post-therapy in generalized aggressive periodontitis (GAgP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis of this clinical trial included 6012 tooth sites at 1002 teeth in 36 patients; they were randomly assigned to three protocols: Systemically intake of MOX or AMOX + ME plus SRP, or SRP + placebo for 7 days. The clinical effect of the patient, tooth, and site characteristics, in terms of CAL gain and PD reduction, was explored using a multilevel linear model. P < 0.05 was statistically significant. RESULTS: Following 6 months of treatment, the differences between the groups were statistically significant, favoring the MOX and AMOX + ME protocols (P < 0.0001). Moreover, the multilevel model showed that adjunctive MOX, AMOX + ME, non-molar, and interproximal sites were the features that contribute significantly to CAL improvement, and PD decreases in GAgP (P ≤ 0.001 for all). CONCLUSION: The most relevant characteristics for the changes in CAL increase and PD diminution, after adjunctive antimicrobials, were ascribable to the features related to the tooth. MOX and AMOX + ME, non-multi-radicular-tooth, and interdental sites indicated superior clinical gains at the tooth and site levels in GAgP.

Antimicrobial resistance of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis and Tannerella forsythia in periodontitis patients.

OBJECTIVES: Administration of systemic antimicrobials as an adjunct to mechanical treatment of periodontitis and sites with adverse clinical results leads to improved outcomes. This study aimed to assess the antimicrobial susceptibility of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis and Tannerella forsythia isolated from periodontitis patients to amoxicillin, metronidazole, azithromycin and moxifloxacin. METHODS: A total of 76 patients diagnosed with generalised periodontitis were included in the study. Subgingival samples were processed by culture. Etest was used to determine susceptibility to amoxicillin, metronidazole, azithromycin and moxifloxacin. RESULTS: A total of 141 isolates from 76 patients were evaluated, including 61 P. gingivalis, 43 T. forsythia and 37 A. actinomycetemcomitans. Etest results showed complete susceptibility of A. actinomycetemcomitans, P. gingivalis and T. forsythia to moxifloxacin. However, the isolates presented reduced susceptibility to the other antimicrobial agents investigated. Of the A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates, 70.3%, 40.5% and 89.2% were resistant to amoxicillin, azithromycin and metronidazole, respectively. The P. gingivalis samples showed relatively similar rates of resistance to amoxicillin (24.6%), azithromycin (21.3%) and metronidazole (24.6%). Similarly, 25.6%, 21.0% and 25.6% of the T. forsythia isolates were resistant to amoxicillin, azithromycin, and metronidazole, respectively. CONCLUSION: These findings show that moxifloxacin may be a promising antimicrobial agent against P. gingivalis, T. forsythia and A. actinomycetemcomitans for the treatment of periodontitis. However, amoxicillin, azithromycin and metronidazole were less effective, especially against A. actinomycetemcomitans in vitro.