1

Antibiotic Prophylaxis: When and Why

This course was developed for the Tennessee Dental Hygienists’ Association by

Frieda Pickett, RDH, MS; Revised October 2018 by Lynn Russell, RDH, EdD

A continuing education course presented by the Tennessee Dental Hygienists’ Association for one (1)

credit hour to meet Tennessee requirements for a course on chemical dependency. To earn credit, the

article must be read and the test that follows be scored at 80% or better to be accepted to meet state

requirements for the continuing education credit. A certificate of credit will be mailed within two (2)

weeks of completing the online course and should be placed in an official file for verification of earning

the credit(s) or d downloaded to CE Broker.

Objectives

The participant will be able to

1. Describe changes in guidelines for dental management of the client with a total joint replacement.

2. Describe changes in guidelines for dental management of the client with heart valve issues

requiring antibiotic prophylaxis

3. Identify the best evidence studying the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis before dental

treatment to prevent prosthetic joint infection and CA- Infective Endocarditis.

4. Identify potential adverse effects from taking antibiotics indiscriminately.

5. Review the recent ADA position statement and systematic review (2017) regarding the use of

antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedures for individuals with a prosthetic joint or heart

condition.

Introduction

Infective endocarditis (IE), also referred to as bacterial endocarditis (BE), is an infection caused

by certain bacteria that enter the bloodstream and settle in the heart lining, a heart valve or a

blood vessel. Infective endocarditis is uncommon, but people with some heart conditions have a

higher risk of developing it (AHA, 2018).

Total joint replacement, or arthroplasty, represents a significant advance in the treatment of

disabling joint pathologies. Surgical replacement can be performed on any joint of the body,

including hips, knees, ankles, shoulders, elbows, wrists, and fingers. The vast majority of joint

replacements involve the knee and the hip. Surgical replacement of total hip and knee joint

arthroplasty is expected to increase due to an aging population, the most common reason for

replacement being disabling effects of arthritis (both osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis

(Horder, 1909; Thayer, 1926). Although the worldwide prevalence of total joint replacements is

unclear, what is clear is that hip and knee replacement is a standard procedure in the orthopedic

practice of medicine. Prosthetic joint infections are the most common reason for prosthetic joint

failure.

2

Prosthetic joint infections are not common, but serious complications do occur in a tiny

percentage (0.3 to 1.0%) of patients after primary total hip replacement and (1.0 to 2.0%) of

patients after primary total knee replacements. The most significant risk occurs during the first

two postoperative years (6.5, 3.2, and 1.4 infections per 1000 patient-years during the first year,

second year, and after the second year, respectively).3 Staphylococci (S. aureus) are the most

common bacterial cause of prosthetic joint infections. This microorganism is uncommon in the

oral cavity.3 Devastating personal and financial consequences can arise following such an

infection. Treatment often requires removal of the infected prosthesis and prolonged intravenous

antimicrobial therapy, along with an estimated cost that may exceed $50,000.00 for each

episode.4 This was the primary reason that orthopedists supported the use of antibiotic

prophylaxis before the dental procedures, believing it might prevent the infection.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis: Prosthetic Joints and Orthopedic Implants

The American Dental Association has found it is no longer necessary for most dental patients

with orthopedic implants to have antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infection.

From the American Dental Association:

Antibiotic prophylaxis (or premedication) is merely the taking of antibiotics

before some dental procedures such as teeth cleaning, tooth extractions, root

canals, and deep cleaning between the tooth root and gums to prevent

infection. We all have bacteria in our mouths, and a number of dental

treatments—and even daily routines like chewing, brushing or flossing—can

allow bacteria to enter the bloodstream (bacteremia). For most of us, this isn’t

a problem. A healthy immune system will prevent these bacteria from causing

any harm. There is a concern, however, that bacteria in the bloodstream could

cause infection elsewhere in the body.

Prior to 2012, premedication prior to dental procedures was common for joint

replacement patients, even though there was little evidence to support the

practice and experts recommended against its practice for most dental

patients. In 2012, the American Dental Association and American Association

of Orthopedic Surgeons published updated guidelines, stating that dentists

“might consider discontinuing the practice of routinely prescribing

prophylactic antibiotics.”

In January 2015, the American Dental Association's Council on Scientific Affairs issued another

guideline, which continued to discourage prophylactic antibiotic use for most patients with

prosthetic joint implants. Guidelines are re-evaluated every few years to make sure that they are

based on the best scientific evidence.

3

Based on careful review of the scientific literature, the American Dental Association found that

most dental treatments are not associated with prosthetic joint implant infections and that

antibiotics given before dental procedures do not prevent such infections.

In fact, for most people, the known risks of taking antibiotics may outweigh the uncertain

benefits. Known risks related to antibiotic use include nausea, gastric upset and the potential for

allergic reactions, including anaphylactic shock. Other risks include developing antibiotic

resistance to bacteria, which can complicate treatment of infections such as strep throat, pink

eye, and meningitis; as well as increasing the risk of C. difficile infection, which causes diarrhea

and intestinal problems. Patients over 70 years old are also at an increased risk of exhibiting

symptoms of adverse reactions to some antibiotics.

Additionally, the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons is unable to recommend for or

against the use of topical, oral antimicrobials in patients with prosthetic joint implants or other

orthopedic implants undergoing dental procedures. Based on research the AAOS has made the

following statements concerning recommendations when the research is inconclusive, consensus:

Practitioners/ clinicians should feel little constraint in deciding whether to follow a

recommendation labeled as inconclusive and should exercise judgment and be attuned to

any future publications that clarify existing evidence for determining the balance of

benefits versus potential harm. It has been determined that patient preference should have

a substantial influencing role.

In the absence of reliable evidence linking poor oral health to prosthetic joint infection, it

is the opinion of the AAOS work group that patients with prosthetic joint implants or

other orthopedic implants maintain appropriate oral hygiene. The supporting evidence is

lacking and requires the workgroup to make a recommendation based on an expert

opinion by considering the known potential harm and benefits associated with the

treatment. A Consensus recommendation means that expert opinion supports the

guideline recommendation even though there is no available empirical evidence that

meets the inclusion criteria.

Implications: Practitioners should be flexible in deciding whether to follow a

recommendation classified as Consensus, although they may set boundaries on

alternatives. Patient preference should have a substantial influencing role.

For example, one may read a recent study or paper on antibiotic prophylaxis. Here are some

guidelines to consider when determining if a protocol should be changed.

Description: Evidence from two or more “Low” strength studies with consistent findings,

or evidence from a single Moderate quality study recommending for or against the

intervention or diagnostic. A Limited recommendation means the quality of the

supporting evidence that exists is unconvincing, or that well-conducted studies show little

clear advantage to one approach versus another.

4

Implications: Practitioners should be cautious in deciding whether to follow a

recommendation classified as Limited and should exercise judgment and be alert to

emerging publications that report evidence. Patient preference should have a substantial

influencing role.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Heart Patients

The American Dental Association in conjunction with the American Heart Association (AHA)

released guidelines for the prevention of infective endocarditis in 2007 (Wilson et al.), which

were approved by the CSA group (Codes and Standards) as they relate to dentistry in 2008

(Wilson et al.). In 2017, the AHA and American College of Cardiology (ACC) published a

focused update to their 2014 guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease that

reinforce the previous recommendations (Nishimura et al., 2017).

Current guidelines endorse infective endocarditis premedication for a small subset of patients. A

review of scientific evidence, which showed that the risk or premedication outweighs the

benefits of prophylaxis for many patients that would have been eligible for prophylaxis in earlier

versions of the guidelines. The possible development of drug-resistant bacteria was a significant

factor.

The available data has been varied as to whether antibiotics taken before a dental procedure will

actually prevent infective endocarditis. The guidelines state that individuals at risk for infective

endocarditis are habitually exposed to oral bacteria while attending to necessary daily activities

such as brushing or flossing. The disease management guidelines recommend that persons at

high risk of developing bacterial infective endocarditis should establish and maintain the best

possible oral health to reduce potential sources of bacterial seeding (Nishimura et al., 2017).

Patient Selection

The current infective endocarditis/valvular heart disease guidelines state that the use of

preventive antibiotics before specific dental procedures is reasonable for patients with:

• prosthetic cardiac valves, including transcatheter-implanted prostheses and homograft

• prosthetic material used for cardiac valve repairs, such as annuloplasty rings and chords

• history of infective endocarditis;

• a cardiac transplanta with valve regurgitation due to a structurally abnormal valve;

• following congenital (present from birth) heart disease:b

• unrepaired cyanotic congenital heart disease, including palliative shunts and conduits

• any repaired congenital heart defect with residual shunts or valvular regurgitation at the

site of or adjacent to the site of a prosthetic patch or a prosthetic device

a According to limited data, infective endocarditis appears to be more common in heart

transplant recipients than in the general population; the risk of infective endocarditis is highest

in the first six months after transplant because of endothelial disruption, high-intensity

5

immunosuppressive therapy, frequent central venous catheter access, and frequent

endomyocardial biopsies. b Except for the conditions listed above, antibiotic prophylaxis is no longer recommended for any

other form of congenital heart disease.

Pediatric Patients

Congenital heart disease can indicate that prescription prophylactic antibiotics may be

appropriate for children. When antibiotic prophylaxis is called for due to congenital heart

concerns, they should only be considered when the patient has:

• Cyanotic congenital heart disease (congenital disabilities with oxygen levels lower than

average) that has not been repaired (children with surgical shunts and conduits may be

included in this group)

• A congenital heart defect that's been completely repaired with prosthetic material (up to

six months after the repair)

• Repaired congenital heart disease with remaining defects, such as leakage near to a

prosthetic patch or device.

Antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended for any other form of congenital heart disease.

Beyond identifying the specific patient population for whom antibiotic prophylaxis is

appropriate, special consideration should be given to the antibiotic dose prescribed to

children, as it will vary according to the child’s weight. Weight-based regimens for children

are outlined in Table 2 of the 2007 American Heart Association guidelines. As with any

medication, check with the primary caregiver to determine whether the child has an allergy to

antibiotics or other antibiotic related concerns before prescribing.

Regimens for a Dental Procedure

Situation Agent Adult (single dose 30-60 min.

prior)

Children (single dose

30-60 min. prior)

Oral Amoxicillin 2 grams 50 mg per kilogram

IM or IV Ampicillin OR

Cefazolin or

ceftriaxone

2 g IM* or IV† 1 g IM or IV 50 mg/kg IM or IV 50

mg/kg IM or IV

Penicillin

Allergy- Oral

CephalexinठOR

Clindamycin OR

Azithromycin or

clarithromycin

2 g

600 mg

500 mg

50 mg/kg

20 mg/kg

15 mg/kg

Penicillin

Allergy- IM

or IV

Cefazolin or

ceftriaxone§ OR

Clindamycin

1 g IM or IV

600 mg IM or IV

50 mg/kg IM or

IV 20 mg/kg IM or IV

6

IM: Intramuscular. † IV: Intravenous. ‡ Or other first- or second-generation oral cephalosporin in equivalent adult

or pediatric dosage. § Cephalosporins should not be used in a person with a history of anaphylaxis, angioedema or

urticaria with penicillins or ampicillin.

Dental Procedures

Prophylaxis is recommended for the patients identified in the previous section for all dental

procedures that involve manipulation of gingival tissue or the periapical region of the teeth, or

perforation of the oral mucosa.

Additional Considerations About Infective Endocarditis Antibiotic Prophylaxis (When

Indicated)

Sometimes, patients may forget to premedicate before their appointments. The recommendation

is that for patients with an indication for antibiotic prophylaxis, the antibiotic is given before the

procedure. This is important because it allows the antibiotic to reach adequate blood levels.

However, the guidelines to prevent infective endocarditis, state, “If the dosage of antibiotic is

inadvertently not administered before the procedure, the dosage may be administered up to 2

hours after the procedure.” If a patient with an indication for prophylaxis who appropriately

received antibiotic premedication prior to a dental procedure one day and who is then scheduled

the following day for a dental procedure also warranting premedication (e.g., dental

prophylaxis), the antibiotic prophylaxis regimen should be repeated prior to the second

appointment. Because of the nature of the pharmacokinetics of an antibiotic prophylaxis

regimen, a single loading dose is given in order to cover the period of potential bacteremia

produced by a single procedure (Bahrani- Mougeot et al., 2008).

Another concern that dentists have expressed involves patients who require prophylaxis but are

already taking antibiotics for another condition. In these cases, the guidelines for infective

endocarditis recommend that the dentist select an antibiotic from a different class than the one

the patient is already taking (Mylonakis & Calderwood, 2001). For example, if the patient is

taking amoxicillin, the dentist should select clindamycin, azithromycin or clarithromycin for

prophylaxis.

In 2015, The Lancet published a study out of the United Kingdom that reported a correlation

between the institution of more limited antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines by the National Institute

for Health and Clinical Evidence (NICE) in 2008 and an increase in cases of infective

endocarditis.13 Because of the retrospective and observational nature of the study, the authors

acknowledged that their “data do not establish a causal association.” At this time, the ADA

recommends that dentists continue to use the AHA/ACC guidelines discussed above. Dental

professionals should periodically visit the ADA website for updates on this issue.

7

Whom Can Antibiotic Prophylaxis Help?

Depending on the patient’s personal medical history, one may still be a candidate for

premedication. For example, antibiotic prophylaxis might be useful for patients undergoing

dental procedures that also have compromised immune systems (due to, for instance, diabetes,

rheumatoid arthritis, cancer, chemotherapy, and chronic steroid use), which increases the risk of

orthopedic implant infection. It may also benefit others with heart conditions. Patients should

talk with their dentist and physician about whether antibiotic prophylaxis before dental treatment

is necessary.

The possibility that bacteremia from the mouth could cause infective endocarditis was first

suggested more than 100 years ago, and it was later reinforced by others who targeted the

viridans group streptococci usually from poor oral hygiene and dental extractions. These

observations, along with the advent of antibiotics, eventually led to the first guidelines from the

American Heart Association regarding antibiotics as a preventive measure in dentistry in 1955.

Antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) became the primary focus for prevention of infective endocarditis and a

standard of care for countries around the world. Controversy concerning efficacy and safety issues has

existed for more than 30 years, and there has been a steady reduction in the patient populations and

the procedures suggested for antibiotic prophylaxis since that time. Of concern, and despite

decreasing emphasis on antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiac patients, upwards of 25 noncardiac

patient populations are recommended for pretreatment antibiotics by some clinicians out of

concern for systemic infections that might originate from dental procedures (e.g., prosthetic

joints) (Lockhart et al., 2007).

Because there are significant differences in recommendations from experts in the United States,

the United Kingdom, and other countries one can surmise a lack of convincing data to either

enforce or dispute this practice. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)

in the United Kingdom issued new recommendations in 2006, which took the bold step of

eliminating antibiotic prophylaxis altogether(Lockhart &Brennan,2008). Current American HA

guidelines narrow the focus to only a few cardiac groups at higher risk for a bad outcome from

IE but who represent ≈10% of all people at risk for infective endocarditis. (Wilson et al., 2007).

The AHA-defined moderate-risk groups represent ≈90% of people at risk for infective

endocarditis, all of whom were recommended for antibiotic prophylaxis before 2007. There are,

therefore, no preventive guidelines for the millions of people in the United States at risk for

contracting infective endocarditis but who are not felt to benefit from AP (Mylonakis &

Calderwood, 2001).

Although there is an understandable concern on the part of some cardiologists and some patients

about eliminating AP, a recent retrospective study by Thornhill et al. (2011) suggests that AP has

no significant impact on the incidence of, or death from, IE. The authors point out that these

8

findings may not apply to patients in the higher risk groups because ≈20% of physicians in the

United Kingdom may continue to use antibiotic prophylaxis despite NICE guidelines that

mandate a cessation for this practice unless the patient requests it. This group did find a modest

increase in the incidence of IE over their 10-year period as a result of both streptococci and

staphylococci.

Support for the role of oral bacteria as a significant cause of infective endocarditis comes mostly

from 2 sources. The best evidence for this association is the frequency with which specifically

oral bacterial species are cultured from the blood of patients with community-associated

infective endocarditis (CA-IE). The literature suggests that 20% to 65% of cases of infective

endocarditis worldwide result from bacteria that can be found in or are exclusive to, the mouth

Mylokanis, & Calderwood, 2001; Tleyeh, I.M et al.,2005). This wide range of cases of infective

endocarditis attributed to oral bacteria stems, in part, from the use of standard biochemical rather

than molecular methods of bacterial identification (Bahrani-Mougeot et al., 2008). For example,

reports of viridans group streptococcus are not specific enough to implicate the mouth as the

source. Other supporting documentation comes from >75 years of bacteremia studies of dental

procedures and other manipulations of gingival tissues (Okell & Elliott, 1935). These studies

suggest a wide range of incidence of bacteremia from species known to cause Infective

Endocarditis, and one must conclude that oral bacteremia is likely to occur with the majority of

dental office visits. These studies use surrogate measures of risk for IE (i.e., incidence, duration,

nature, and magnitude of bacteremia), but they have driven the focus on antibiotic prophylaxis

for dental procedures since the 1950s.

Retrospective case-control studies provide a closer look at this relationship. Strom et al. (1998)

contacted patients who had been hospitalized (cases) for infective endocarditis at 1 of 54

hospitals in the Philadelphia area and compared them with matched community residents

(controls). His group found that recent dental treatment was no more frequent in cases than in

controls, and they concluded that dental treatment did not seem to be a risk factor for CA-IE. The

study by DeSimone et al. (2012) in Circulation moves the clinician to a better understanding of

the efficacy for AP by conducting the first population-based study in the United States to

determine the impact of the 2007 American Heart Association guidelines. The group focused on

cases of infective endocarditis from presumed oral streptococci over a 12-year period and found

no increase in viridans group streptococcus infective endocarditis in the 2+ years since 2007. Of

interest, 2 of the three patients who developed infective endocarditis from viridans group

streptococcus after 2007 had not been to the dentist in the previous six months, and the third

patient had antibiotic prophylaxis before a recent dental office procedure.

Case-control, population-based, and other epidemiological investigations often have

methodological weaknesses that soften their impact: (1) small sample size and power; (2) subject

recall bias; (3) demographics that may not be representative of the general population; (4)

incubation time frames that are too long for infective endocarditis; (5) the imperfect nature of

hospital and national databases on admission and discharge coding and nonspecific ICD-9

9

coding of bacterial species. Nevertheless, results from well-designed studies are essential

because they provide additional evidence that the well-intentioned focus on antibiotic

prophylaxis may be misdirected.

The AHA, Institute of Medicine, NICE, and other professional groups have called for studies

that would resolve this longstanding question concerning the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis

and clarify the role of poor oral hygiene and resulting periodontal disease in the pathogenesis of

infective endocarditis (NICE, 2008;Wilson et al., 2007; Institute of Medicine, 2000). A

prospective, randomized, double-blind study of antibiotic prophylaxis in people at risk for CA-

IE, however, has significant obstacles:

(1) there are ethical and legal concerns about randomizing people in the AHA higher risk

group to a placebo

(2) such a trial would only address the 10% of people currently recommended for

antibiotic prophylaxis in the United States

(3) given the rarity of infective endocarditis, it has been estimated that upwards of 30 000

people at risk would be needed to detect a clinically significant antibiotic prophylaxis

treatment effect, and the cost of this trial would be prohibitive.

Transient bacteremia frequently occurs as a result of dental plaque accumulation, evolving to a

dense mat of oral bacteria around the teeth which cross the inflamed periodontal pocket tissues to

the circulation. Clearly, this must be the primary source and portal of entry for the oral bacterial

species that cause upwards of 25% of cases of CA-IE. Current science strongly suggests that

poor oral hygiene and periodontal disease are far more significant risk factors for the

development of oral bacteria–related IE than invasive dental procedures. The most extensive

study to date compared to tooth extraction, a highly invasive dental procedure, with tooth

brushing as a standard, naturally-occurring source of bacteremia (Lockhart et al., 2008). This

group found that the incidence of bacteremia from tooth brushing (32%) was high enough to

strongly suggest that bacteremia from various activities of daily living (chewing food as well)

may occur hundreds of times more often than bacteremia from dental office procedures.

It has been suggested that some individuals may generate bacteremia for 90 hours each month

from such physiological causes, by comparison with dental office procedure–generated

bacteremia of 1 to 2 times per year on average (Guntheroth, 1984). This study provides unique

documentation of a strong association between 3 oral hygiene and gingival disease measures and

the incidence of bacteremia with Infective Endocarditis-related species (Lockhart, 2009). These

associations strengthened with higher levels of dental plaque and calculus and gingival disease.

DeSimone and colleagues have provided further data to reinforce the trend toward a significantly

decreased number of cardiac patients recommended for AP, as well as support for a more

definitive study to determine the extent to which oral hygiene, periodontal disease, and oral

bacteria are associated with CA- Infective Endocarditis. These data would improve our

understanding of risk factors and refocus efforts on prevention of Infective Endocarditis to

improving oral hygiene and preventing periodontal disease. This information has the potential to

10

reduce the overall incidence of CA- Infective Endocarditis, it would be immediately transferable

to everyday clinical practice, and it would inform future AHA and other international guidelines

on preventive strategies for Infective Endocarditis.

Adverse Effects of Antibiotic Prophylaxis

Prior to 1997, any patient with a history of total joint replacement (TJR) was advised to receive

AP prior to oral procedures. During this time concern increased regarding the development of

antibiotic resistance and the connection to the unnecessary use of antibiotics. Antibiotic

prophylaxis was suggested as a practice promoting antibiotic resistance. This adverse effect led

the professional associations’ expert committees to identify appropriate uses for AP in the patient

with TJR. The 2003 ADA/AAOS guidelines determined that only selected individuals with TJR

would likely benefit from AP, and only when specified oral procedures involved significant

bleeding. It was thought at that time that procedures resulting in bleeding were likely to result in

bacteremia. Later research revealed bacteremia resulted in practices unrelated to bleeding, such

as chewing or restorative dental treatment (AOS, 2009).

Other adverse factors associated with AP include nausea, the risk for antibiotic-associated colitis

(C. difficile), candidiasis, drug interactions, and cost.

Efficacy for Antibiotic Prophylaxis to Prevent Prosthetic Joint Infection

Guidelines for the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) prior to oral procedures for individuals

with a joint replacement have gone through several revisions. Guidelines have changed from

using AP before dental procedures for all individuals with a prosthetic joint to using AP for only

selected patients considered to be at high risk for joint infection, then to no recommendation for

AP prior to dental procedures. In December 2012 the American Academy of Orthopedic

Surgeons (AAOS) in collaboration with the American Dental Association (ADA) published three

clinical practice guidelines based on a systematic review (SR) of best evidence related to factors

that might cause joint infection and risk factors for prosthetic joint infection (PJI), followed by

an explanation of the guidelines for practitioners in 2013. These included

(1) The practitioner might consider discontinuing the practice of routinely prescribing

prophylactic antibiotics for patients with hip and knee prosthetic joint implants

undergoing dental procedures.

(2) We are unable to recommend for or against the use of topical, oral antimicrobials in

patients with prosthetic joint implants or other orthopedic implants undergoing dental

procedures.

11

(3) In the absence of reliable evidence linking poor oral health to prosthetic joint infection, it

is the opinion of the work group that patients with prosthetic joint implants or other

orthopedic implants maintain appropriate oral hygiene.

A central goal of the review was to examine the evidence directed towards efficacy (do they

work, and if so, how well?) of AP to prevent PJI. The 2012 AAOS/ADA guideline #1 called for

practitioners to “consider discontinuing the use of AP before dental procedures when the client

has a knee or hip prosthetic joint.” The guideline statement was followed, however, by an

explanation that the recommendation was based on only one prospective case-control study5,

considered to be “limited evidence.” The guideline authors wrote that practitioners should not

feel compelled to follow a guideline based on “limited evidence.” This negative statement was

confusing to many. Multiple groups involved in the scientific investigation agreed there was an

absence of level 1 evidence (randomized controlled trials) for or against the use of prophylactic

antibiotics in patients with prosthetic joints undergoing invasive dental treatment. The 2012

ADA/AAOS guidelines were published, but they did little to guide practitioners regarding

evidence-based professional decisions for dental management of the client with a joint

replacement. Most authorities in dentistry agree professional judgment must depend on the client

history of infection in the joint space following joint replacement, and the strength of the host

immune response to resolve the infection (Jevsevar & Abt, 2013).

In January of 2015, the ADA Council of Scientific Affairs Expert Panel on Antibiotic

Prophylaxis attempted to determine if AP was needed for individuals having a prosthetic joint,

seeking dental treatment. In the Clinical Guidelines publication, the Expert Panel used four

studies which were deemed to answer the focused question “Does antibiotic prophylaxis prevent

prosthetic joint infection?” The Expert Panel determined “In general, for patients with prosthetic

joint implants, prophylactic antibiotics are not recommended prior to dental procedures to

prevent prosthetic joint infection” (Sollecito, Abt, et al. 2015). For patients who have had

previous complications (such as previous joint infection, or are immunocompromised) and who

will have gingival manipulation (scaling/periodontal debridement) or mucosal incision,

consultation with the physician is advised before making final decisions regarding whether or not

to use antibiotic prophylaxis.

In 2009, without collaboration with the ADA, a committee of the AAOS published a new

statement calling for antibiotic prophylaxis prior to oral procedures in all individuals with a TJR.

This caused worldwide confusion since an examination of worldwide professional guidelines for

AP at that time revealed many professional organizations in the United Kingdom (UK), Japan

and European countries did not recommend AP prior to dental procedures to prevent PJIs.

One factor associated with a lower risk of PJI was good oral hygiene or oral health. This study

was considered in the 2012 ADA/AAOS third recommendation.

12

Role of Oral Health

Randomized studies have demonstrated that bacteremia after tooth brushing is associated with

poor oral hygiene and gingival bleeding. The tooth brushing study reported an almost eightfold

increase in the risk for bacteremia in the group with generalized bleeding. An analysis of data

from this study reported the incidence of bacteremia in the group with high plaque and calculus

scores was not significantly different from the group having a single tooth extraction. Results,

such as this, support the recommendation for individuals with prosthetic joints to maintain oral

cleanliness and healthy oral tissues. The recommendation for individuals to maintain healthy

periodontal tissues and reduce apical or other oral infection comes from the logic that healthy

tissues would lower the magnitude of bacteremia. Since having bacteria in the circulation is the

perceived avenue for late prosthetic joint infection (occurring at least three months after

prosthetic placement), this recommendation seems logical. It must be stated, however, that no

research has demonstrated that healthy oral tissues prevent PJI. Good oral hygiene and

prevention of dental disease could decrease the frequency of bacteremia from daily activities and

may protect against PJI. One must remember, developing a recommendation to give AP before

oral procedures to prevent associated bacteremia formation and PJI when research does not

demonstrate the practice to be successful, is not an evidence-based clinical decision.

Conclusion

The 2015 development of clinical guidelines for dentistry (ADA alone) clarifies the confusion

that resulted from the 2012 ADA/AAOS guidelines. “The 2014 Panel judged with moderate

certainty that there is no association between dental procedures and the occurrence of PJIs.” The

Panel stated there is no recommendation for AP prior to oral procedures for individuals with a

prosthetic joint. The Panel made the decision based on results of 3, out of 4 studies, reporting no

association between PJI and dental procedures. Since the adverse effects of taking antibiotics

injudiciously include the development of antibiotic resistance, as well as other potential

infections (antibiotic-associated colitis, candidiasis) this clinical judgment must be based on

evidence-based science. The benefits and risks of AP to the patient with a prosthetic joint who

seeks oral procedures must be clearly defined. For individuals with a history of complications

associated with joint replacement and who will have oral procedures involving manipulation of

the gingivae or mucosal incision, medical consultation is recommended regarding the benefit of

AP (Sollecito, Abt, et al., 2015).

13

References

American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Information Statement 1033, (2009). Antibiotic

prophylaxis for bacteremia in patients with joint replacements.

http://www.aaos.org/about/pers/advistmt/1033.asp. Accessed November 4, 2018.

American Dental Association and American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (2003):

Advisory statement: Antibiotic prophylaxis for dental patients with prosthetic joint replacements.

Journal of the American Dental Association.;134:895-99.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis For Dental Procedures - Ahajournals.org. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/circulationaha.112.115204

Bahrani-Mougeot, F.K., Paster, B.J., Coleman, S., Ashar, J., Knost, S., Sautter, R.L., Lockhart,

P.B. (2008). Identification of oral bacteria in blood cultures by conventional versus molecular

methods. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod.;105:720–724.

Bahrani-Mougeot, F.K., Paster, B.J., Coleman, S., Ashar, J., Barbuto, S., Lockhart, P.B. (2008).

Diverse and novel oral bacterial species in blood following dental procedures. Journal of

Clinical Microbiology. 46:2129–2132.

Berbari, E.F. , Osmon, D.R., Carr, A. et al.(2010). Dental procedures as risk factors for

prosthetic hip or knee infection: A hospital-based prospective case-control study. Clinical

Infectious Diseases.;50:8–16.

Dajani, A.S., Bisno, A.L., Chung, K.J., et al.(1990). Prevention of bacterial endocarditis.

Recommendations by the American Heart Association. Journal of the American Medical

Association.;264(22):2919-22.

Dayer, M.J., Jones, S., Prendergast, B., et al. (2015) Incidence of infective endocarditis in

England, 2000-13: a secular trend, interrupted time-series analysis. Lancet,385(9974):1219-28.

DeSimone, D.C., Tleyjeh, I.M., Correa ,de Sa, D.D., Anavekar, N.S., Lahr, B.D., Sohail, M.R.,

Steckelberg, J.M., Wilson, W.R., Baddour, L.M. (2012). Incidence of infective endocarditis

caused by viridans group Streptococci before and after publication of the 2007 American Heart

Association's endocarditis prevention guidelines. Circulation;126:60–64.

Enzler, M.J., Berbari, E., Osmon, D.R., (2011). Antimicrobial prophylaxis in adults. Mayo Clin

Proc.; 86(7):686-701. Available at

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3127564/pdf/mayoclinproc_86_7_012.pdf.

14

Accessed October 25, 2018.

Gomez, E.O., Osmon, D.R., Berbari, E.F. (2011). Do patients with prosthetic joints require

dental antimicrobial prophylaxis? Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine;78(1):36-38.

Gross, L. (2013) AAOS, ADA release CPG for prophylactic antibiotics. Journal American

Academy of Orthopedic Surgery, 21:195-97.

Guntheroth, W.G.(1984). How important are dental procedures as a cause of infective

endocarditis? American Journal of Cardiology.;54:797–801.

Horder, T.J.(1909). Infective endocarditis with an analysis of 150 cases and with special

reference to the chronic form of the disease. Quarterly Journal of Medicine;2:289–324.

Hussein, H., Brown R. S. (2016). Risk-benefit assessment for antibiotic prophylaxis in asplenic

dental patients. General Dentistry, 64(4):62-5.

Infective Endocarditis | American Heart Association. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/infective-endocarditis

Institute of Medicine Committee on Medicare Coverage Extensions. (2000). Medically necessary

dental services. In: Field MJ, Lawrence RL, Zwanziger L, editors. Extending Medicare Coverage

for Preventive and Other Services. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; p. 63–98.

Issues in Professional Judgment: Antibiotic Prophylaxis in ... (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.jaypeejournals.com/eJournals/ShowText.aspx?ID=2694&TYP=TOP&Va

Jevsevar, D.S., Abt, E. (2013). The new AAOS-ADA clinical practice guideline on prevention of

orthopedic implant infection in patients undergoing dental procedures. Journal American

Academy of Orthopedic Surgery,; 21:195-97.

Kao, F., Hsu, Y., Chen, W., Lin, J., Lo, Y., & Tu, Y. (2017). Prosthetic joint infection following

invasive dental procedures and antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with hip or knee

arthroplasty. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 38(2), 154-161.

doi:10.1017/ice.2016.248

Lockhart, P.B., Loven, B., Brennan, M.T., Fox, P.C.(2007). The evidence base for the efficacy

of antibiotic prophylaxis in dental practice. Journal of the American Dental Association.

138:458–474.

Lockhart, P.B., Brennan, M.T., Sasser, H.C., Fox, P.C., Paster, B.J., Bahrani-Mougeot,

F.K.(2008) Bacteremia associated with tooth brushing and dental extraction. Circulation.

117:3118–3125.

15

Lockhart, P.B., Brennan, M.T., Thornhill, M., Michalowicz, B.S., Noll, J., Bahrani-Mougeot,

F.K., Sasser, H.C. (2009). Poor oral hygiene as a risk factor for infective endocarditis-related

bacteremia. Journal of the American Dental Association; 140:1238–1244.

Mylonakis, E, Calderwood, S.B., (2001). Infective endocarditis in adults. New England Journal

of Medicine. 245:1318–1330.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Antimicrobial Prophylaxis against

infective endocarditis. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2008.

NICE clinical guideline 64. http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG64. Accessed November 4, 2018.

Lockhart, P.B., Brennan, M.T., Sasser, H.C., et al. (2008). Bacteremia associated with

toothbrushing and dental extraction. Circulation; 117(24):3118–25.

NICE Short Clinical Guidelines Technical Team, (2008). Prophylaxis against infective

endocarditis: antimicrobial prophylaxis against infective endocarditis in adults and children

undergoing interventional procedures. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical

Excellence;

Nishimura, R.A., Otto, C.M., Bonow, R.O., et al. (2017). AHA/ACC Focused Update of the

2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A

Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on

Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation; 135: e1159-e1195. Accessed October 4, 2018.

Okell, C.C., Elliott, S.D. (1935). Bacteremia and oral sepsis with special reference to the etiology

of subacute endocarditis. Lancet; 2:869–872.

Pallasch, T.J., Slots, J. (2000, 1996). Antibiotic prophylaxis and the medically compromised

patient. Periodontology; 10:107-38.

Sollecito, T.P., Abt, E., Lockhart, P.B., et al. (2015). The use of prophylactic antibiotics prior to

dental procedures in patients with prosthetic joints. Journal of the American Dental Association

146(1):11-16. Available at http://jada.ada.org/article/S0002-8177(14)00019-1/pdf..

Strom, B.L., Abrutyn, E., Berlin, J.A., Kinman, J.L., Feldman, R.S., Stolley, P.D., Levison,

M.E., Korzeniowski, O.M., Kaye, D.(1998). Dental and cardiac risk factors for infective

endocarditis: a population-based case-control study. Annals of Internal Medicine; 129:761–769.

Thayer, W. (1926).Studies on bacterial (infective) endocarditis. Hopkins Hosp Rep. 1926; 22:1–

185.

Thornhill, M.H., Dayer, M.J., Forde, J.M., Corey, G.R., Chu, V.H., Couper, D.J., Lockhart, P.B.

(2011). Impact of the NICE guideline recommending cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis for

prevention of infective endocarditis: before and after study. British Medical Journal.; 342:d2392.

Tleyjeh, I.M., Steckelberg, J.M., Murad, H.S., Anavekar, N.S, Ghomrawi, H.M., Mirzoyev, Z,

Moustafa, S.E., Hoskin, T.L., Mandrekar, J.N., Wilson, W.R., Baddour, L.M. (2005).Temporal

16

trends in infective endocarditis: a population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota.

Journal of the American Medical Association. 293:3022–3028.

Wilson, W., Taubert, K.A., Gewitz, M., Lockhart, P.B., Baddour, L.M., Levison, M., Bolger, A.,

Cabell, C.H., Takahashi, M., Baltimore, R.S., Newburger, J.W., Strom, B.L., Tani, L.Y., Gerber,

M., Bonow, R.O., Pallasch, T.J., Shulman, S.T., Rowley, A.H., Burns, J.C., Ferrieri, P., Gardner,

T., Goff, D., Durack, D.T. (2007). Prevention of infective endocarditis: guidelines from the

American Heart Association. a guideline from the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever,

Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the

Young, and the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and

Anesthesia, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group.

Circulation.;116:1736–1754.

Uckay, I., Pittet, D., Bernard, L., Lew, D., Perrier, A., Peter, R. (2008). Antibiotic prophylaxis

before invasive dental procedures in patients with arthroplasties of the hip and knee. J Bone Joint

Surg Br; 90:833-838.

Wilson W, Taubert KA, Gewitz M, et al. (2008) Prevention of infective endocarditis: guidelines

from the American Heart Association: a guideline from the American Heart Association

Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis and Kawasaki Disease Committee, Council on Cardiovascular

Disease in the Young, and the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular

Surgery and Anesthesia, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary

Working Group. Journal of the American Dental Association;139 Suppl:3S-24S.

17

Antibiotic Prophylaxis: When and Why

CE Article Post-Test:

1. Infective endocarditis is also known as? a. Cardioarthroplasty b. Viral pericarditis c. Bacterial endocarditis d. Systemic endocarditis

2. Surgical replacement can be performed on any joint of the body, including hips, knees,

ankles, shoulders, elbows, wrists, and fingers. The vast majority of joint replacements involve the knee and the ankle.

a. The first sentence is True; the second is True b. The first sentence is True; the second is False c. The first sentence is False; the second is False d. The first sentence is False, the second is True

3. Beyond identifying the specific patient population for whom antibiotic prophylaxis is

appropriate, special consideration should be given to the antibiotic dose prescribed to children, as it will vary according to the child’s ______.

a. age b. previous treatment history c. weight d. religious affiliation

4. The guidelines to prevent infective endocarditis, state, “If the dosage of antibiotic is inadvertently not administered before the procedure, the dosage may be administered up to 2 hours after the procedure.”

a. True b. False

5. Antibiotic prophylaxis might be useful for patients undergoing dental procedures that

also have compromised immune systems (due to, for instance, ______________). a. arthritis b. diabetes c. cancer d. none of the above e. all of the above

6. The possibility that bacteremia from the mouth could cause infective endocarditis was

first suggested more than ____ years ago. a. 10 b. 15 c. 50 d. 100

18

7. Adverse factors associated with antibiotic prophylaxis:

a. dry mouth b. c. diff c. colitis d. lichen planus e. all of the above f. A, D g. B, C

8. A concern that dentists have expressed involves patients who require prophylaxis but

are already taking antibiotics for another condition. In these cases, the guidelines for infective endocarditis recommend that the dentist select

a. Penn-V-K 500 mg b. E-mycin c. nothing else d. an antibiotic from a different group

9. Current science strongly suggests that ____________ and __________ are far more

significant risk factors for the development of oral bacteria–related IE than invasive dental procedures

a. poor oral hygiene, periodontal disease

b. improper brushing, failed dental appointments

c. electric toothbrushes, stimudents

10. Congenital heart disease can indicate that prescription prophylactic antibiotics may be appropriate for children. When antibiotic prophylaxis is called for due to congenital heart concerns, they should only be considered when the patient has:

a. Cyanotic congenital heart disease (congenital disabilities with oxygen levels lower than average) that has not been repaired (children with surgical shunts and conduits may be included in this group)

b. A congenital heart defect that's been completely repaired with prosthetic material (up to six months after the repair)

c. Repaired congenital heart disease with remaining defects, such as leakage near to a prosthetic patch or device.

d. All of the above

19

Antibiotic Prophylaxis: When and Why (1 Hr)

Answer Sheet

Enter answers below. Please submit this answer sheet TNDHA for grading. Upon receiving a passing score of 80%, the course participant will be sent a Certificate of Completion within two weeks. If you do NOT receive your certificate, please contact the treasurer listed below.

The cost of the course is $20.00 for ADHA members and $40.00 for all other participants. Please send this test answer sheet, appropriate payment and, if applicable, a copy of ADHA membership card to the TNDHA Treasurer.

Susan Melton, RDH slmrdh@comcast.net 5320 Custis Lane

Knoxville, TN 37920

Participant Information

NAME________________________________________________________________

ADDRESS_____________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________ZIP________________

PHONE_____________________________E-MAIL____________________________

Use this section to record your answers to the exam on the previous page. Please place

the corresponding letter answer for each question in the blank provided. Only one

answer is correct.

Question/Answer

1. 6.

2. 7.

3. 8.

4. 9.

5. 10.

CHOOSE METHOD OF PAYMENT o CHECK-Payable to TNDHA OR o CREDIT CARD (Please enter card information on the following page so that

information can be destroyed once payment is complete. CHOOSE ONE:

o ADHA MEMBER $20.00-must submit copy of membership card o NON-MEMBER $40.00

20

Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Prosthetic Joint Replacement

Credit Card Payment

CC#___________________________________________

Exp.________________CVV_______________________

Name on Card___________________________________

Billing Zip Code__________________________________