Patients' Perception of Recovery After Third Molar Surgery Following Postoperative Treatment With Moxifloxacin Versus Amoxicillin and Clavulanic Acid: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Study

Limeres, Jacobo; Sanromán, Jacinto F.; Tomás, Inmaculada; Diz, Pedro

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.061

« Previous Next »Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 67, Issue 2 , Pages 286-291, February 2009

Patients' Perception of Recovery After Third Molar Surgery Following Postoperative Treatment With Moxifloxacin Versus Amoxicillin and Clavulanic Acid: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Study

Jacobo Limeres, DDS, PhD
- Clinical Lecturer, Special Needs Unit, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Santiago de Compostela University, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
- Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Limeres: Special Needs Unit, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Santiago de Compostela University, C/Entrerrios sn, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Jacinto F. Sanromán, MD, PhD
- Head of Department, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Policlínico Vigo S.A. Medical Center, Vigo, Spain
Inmaculada Tomás, DDS, PhD
- Research Lecturer, Special Needs Unit, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Santiago de Compostela University, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Pedro Diz, MD, DDS, PhD
- Senior Lecturer, Special Needs Unit, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Santiago de Compostela University, Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Purpose

To analyze the impact of the postoperative administration of moxifloxacin (MXF) on oral function and quality of life after third molar (TM) surgery.

Materials and Methods

A single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was designed. The study population consisted of 100 patients who underwent impacted TM extractions. Patients were distributed into 2 groups of 50 individuals each. Postoperatively, one group was administered MXF (400 mg/24 hours for 5 days); the positive control group received amoxicillin and clavulanic acid (AMX-CLV) (500/125 mg/8 hours for 5 days). Follow-up was performed for 7 postoperative days, during which the patient recorded information on pain, the use of rescue analgesia, undesirable effects of the medication, difficulty in speaking, difficulty in chewing, diet consistency, difficulty performing oral hygiene, asthenia, time in bed, going out of the house, and returning to work.

Results

The administration of MFX was significantly associated with headache, and AMX-CLV was significantly associated with diarrhea. Greater difficulty in chewing and performing oral hygiene was observed in the AMX-CLV group compared with the MXF group. The percentage of patients who tolerated a diet of normal consistency was significantly higher in the MXF group compared with the AMX-CLV group. During the first 4 days of follow-up, the percentage of patients who returned to work was significantly higher in the MXF group than in the AMX-CLV group.

Conclusions

Moxifloxacin shortens the period of postoperative recovery in terms of oral function and return to work. Therefore, MXF could be a useful option in TM surgery when antibiotics are indicated, particularly if patients are allergic to beta-lactams, their oral flora is resistant to macrolides, or they are intolerant of either of these antibiotics.