***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: BACKGROUND Studies suggest that a single prophylactic dose of amoxicillin reduces early implant complications , but it is unclear whether other antibiotics are also effective . This study compared the local antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory effects result ing from a single dose of azithromycin or amoxicillin before surgical placement of one-stage dental implants . METHODS Healthy adult patients requiring one-stage dental implant placement were allocated r and omly to receive either 2 g amoxicillin ( n = 7 ) or 500 mg azithromycin ( n = 6 ) before surgery . Peri-implant crevicular fluid ( PICF ) sample s from the new implant and gingival crevicular fluid ( GCF ) from adjacent teeth were sample d on postoperative days 6 , 13 , and 20 . Inflammatory mediators in the sample s were analyzed by immunoassay , and antibiotic levels were measured by bioassay . RESULTS On day 6 , azithromycin concentrations in GCF and PICF were 3.39 ± 0.73 and 2.77 ± 0.90 μg/mL , respectively , whereas amoxicillin was below the limit of detection . During early healing , patents in the azithromycin group exhibited a significantly greater decrease in GCF volume ( P = 0.03 , analysis of variance ) . At specific times during healing , the azithromycin group exhibited significantly lower levels of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8 in GCF than the amoxicillin group and exhibited significantly lower levels of granulocyte colony stimulating factor , IL-8 , macrophage inflammatory protein-1β , and interferon-gamma-inducible protein-10 in PICF . CONCLUSIONS Azithromycin was available at the surgical site for a longer period of time than amoxicillin , and patients taking azithromycin exhibited lower levels of specific proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in GCF and PICF . Thus , preoperative azithromycin may enhance resolution of postoperative inflammation to a greater extent than amoxicillin Overprescription of antibiotics can cause bacterial resistance problems , leading to life-threatening illnesses and public health crises . Clinicians often believe antibiotics can prevent dental implant failure and postoperative complications . In conjunction with implant surgery , antibiotics are therefore routinely prescribed for all cases . In this double-blind , r and omized controlled trial , the effects of antibiotics on the clinical outcomes of immediate implant placement upon replacing a tooth with an apical pathology were examined to compare  antibiotics ( n = 10 ) and placebo ( n = 10 ) . In each subject , a tooth with a chronic apical lesion was extracted , thoroughly curetted , irrigated , and replaced with single implant with a screw-retained custom provisional abutment/crown .  Postoperative pain/discomfort was measured at 1- and 4-week postsurgical follow-up visits using visual analog scales . Facial alveolar bone and soft-tissue changes were measured using pre- and postoperative cone-beam computerized tomography and impressions . We found survival rates of 100 % ( antibiotics ) and 78 % ( control ) . However , there was no statistical difference in means for any clinical outcome ( t tests with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing ) , except for midfacial soft-tissue changes : 0.43 mm ( SD , 0.76 ) in the antibiotics group and 1.70 mm ( SD , 1.06 ) in the placebo group ( t15 = -2.89 , P = .011 ) . The average change of the midfacial alveolar plate was 0.62 mm ( SD , 0.46 ) and 1.34 mm ( SD , 0.91 ) for the antibiotic and placebo groups , respectively , which did not significantly differ statistically . No significant correlation ( Spearman correlation ) existed between the changes in facial alveolar bone and the facial gingival margin . Antibiotics appear to have little effect on immediate implant treatment outcomes The effect of perioperative chlorhexidine on the frequency of infectious complications through stage II was examined . Chlorhexidine was used perioperatively in 54.6 % of patients ( 52.5 % of implants ) in a Dental Implant Clinical Research Group study with a data base of 2,641 implants ( 595 patients ) . With chlorhexidine , there was a significant reduction in the number of infectious complications ( 4.1 % vs 8.7 % ) . Two percent of implants failed in the absence of an infectious complication , whereas 12 % with infectious complications failed . This sixfold difference is highly significant . Chlorhexidine may reduce microbial complications when used in the immediate perioperative period There are many reasons for dental implant failure , the development of bacteremia is concern for dentists . This is due to the possibility of unfavorable result such as implant loss or the need for re-treatment . In general , antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended for high risk patients such as individuals with an immunodeficiency , infectious endocarditis , or previous prosthetic instrumentation . However regarding clinical ly healthy , low and moderate risk individuals the use of antibiotics in implant dentistry is controversial . Another major concern regarding the over prescription of antibiotics is the selection of antibiotic resistant bacteria . A better underst and ing of the efficacy of prophylactic treatments regarding dental implantation is crucial . Thus a literature review and comparison of survival rates of dental implants with regimens of no , pre or post prophylaxis was performed using systematic literature review using reliable electronic data bases . Retrospective or prospect i ve controlled studies were examined for the influence of preoperative and /or postoperative or no antibiosis on dental implant success rate . Of the 11406 implants used in this literature review , cases with no antibiotics had a 92 % success rate , cases with pre-op antibiotic alone had a 96 % success rate , cases with post-op antibiotic alone had a 97 % success rate and cases with both pre and post-op antibiotic had a success rate of 96 % . Thus , the results from this literature review show a > 90 % success rate when antibiotics are used compared to when they are not used . Thus , no benefit is seen from the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in low and moderate risk dental implant patients . Keywords Dental implants ; Pre-operative prophylactics ; Post-operative prophylactics ; Success The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of two antibiotic regimens in reducing  early dental implant failure .  A preoperative single-dose regimen and a 3-day antibiotic course were compared . Eighty subjects needing dental implant placement were r and omly allocated to one of the two antibiotic prophylaxis regimen groups . In the first group , dental implants were placed after the administration of a single preoperative dose of antibiotic ( 1 g of amoxicillin ) ; no postoperative antibiotics were given . In the second group , dental implants were inserted in patients who received the same preoperative dose of antibiotic as the first group , but the antibiotic was then continued postoperatively for 3 days . Patients returned for postoperative evaluation at 3 days , 7 days , and 12 weeks . The surgical sites were assessed for pain , swelling , wound dehiscence , and pus formation . No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups , probably because of the limited number of patients . Although minor complications were seen in a few patients , all implants were successfully osseointegrated . Until a study with a larger population rules definitively on the role of antibiotics in implant surgery , a single dose of antibiotic before implant placement may be sufficient OBJECTIVES This r and omized clinical trial compares the usefulness of pre- and post-operative antibiotics while strict asepsis was followed during periodontal surgery . MATERIAL AND METHODS Two groups of 40 consecutive patients each with fully or partially edentulous jaws were enrolled .  Antibiotics group ( GrAB(+ ) ) : 23 men , mean age 60 , 128 implants , received oral amoxicillin 1 g , 1 h pre-operatively and 2 g for 2 days post-operatively . Non-antibiotics group ( GrAB(- ) ) : 20 men , mean age 57 , 119 implants , received no antibiotics . Bacterial sample s were taken from the peri-oral skin before and at the end of surgery . In 12 patients in each group , sample s were also taken from the nares . A VAS question naire evaluated symptoms of infection/inflammation by both the patient and the periodontologist at suture removal . RESULTS There were no significant differences between both groups , neither for the clinical parameters nor for the microbiota . Staphylococcus aureus was detected in the nares of one patient only . The patients ' subjective perception of post-operative discomfort was significantly smaller in the group receiving antibiotics . Three patients lost one or two implants . CONCLUSIONS Antibiotics do not provide significant advantages concerning post-operative infections in case of proper asepsis . It also does not reduce peri-oral microbial contamination . It does on the other h and reduce post-operative discomfort PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics for dental implant placement . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Twelve Italian private practice s agreed to participate in this trial , each centre providing 30 patients . One hour prior to implant placement , patients were r and omised , for consumption orally of 2 g amoxicillin or identical placebo tablets . Patients needing bone augmentation procedures were not included . Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures , adverse events and post-operative biological complications . Patients were seen 1 week , 2 weeks and 4 months post-operatively . RESULTS One centre did not deliver any data and 14 patients had to be excluded from the trial for various reasons . One hundred and fifty-eight patients were evaluated in each group and none dropped out at 4 months . Two prostheses and two implants failed in the antibiotics group , compared with four prostheses and nine implants in the placebo group . There were no statistically significant differences for prosthesis failures , implant losses , complications and side effects . CONCLUSIONS No statistically significant differences were observed . However , four times more patients in the placebo group experienced implant failures than in the antibiotic group , and this requires further investigation PURPOSE To evaluate the difference between a single preoperative dose versus an additional two-day postoperative course of oral amoxicillin in patients undergoing conventional dental implant placement . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Two dentists in two different private practice s conducted this study . One hour prior to surgery , patients had to take a single prophylactic antibiotic dose , consisting of 2 g of amoxicillin orally ; after implant placement , patients were r and omly allocated to two different groups : protocol A ( no other antibiotic administration ) and protocol B , ( 1 g of amoxicillin in the evening of the day of surgery and 1 g twice a day for the 2 days after ) . Outcome measures were prosthetic and implant failures , adverse events and early postoperative complications . Patients were followed up to 6 months after functional loading . RESULTS Three hundred and sixty patients were r and omised and treated ( 192 patients in one centre and 168 in the other ) . Five hundred and sixty-seven implants were placed . Protocol A was applied to 180 patients ( 278 implants ) and protocol B also to 180 patients ( 289 implants ) . Data for 17 patients , 14 from protocol A and three from protocol B , were not available . No statistically significant differences were found for the reported outcomes . Two patients of protocol B experienced a prosthetic failure , losing four implants , while no prosthetic failures were reported for protocol A ( P=0.4836 ; difference in proportions=-0.0110 ; 95 % CI : -0.0412 to 0.0119 ) . Five patients ( 3.0 % ) of protocol A lost five implants versus 5 patients ( 2.8 % ) who lost eight implants in protocol B ( P=1.0000 ; difference in proportions=0.0020 ; 95 % CI : -0.0384 to 0.0438 ) . Three adverse events were observed in the total population , all occurring in protocol B ( 1.69 % ) , with no statistically significant differences between the two groups ( P=0.1199 ; difference in proportions=-0.0170 ; 95 % CI : -0.0487 to 0.0059 ) . However , one patient experienced a severe allergic reaction requiring therapy discontinuation and hospital admission . Early postoperative complications occurred in six patients of protocol A and in four patients of protocol B , with no statistically significant differences ( P=0.5170 ; difference in proportions=0.0130 ; 95 % CI : -0.0254 to 0.0568 ) . CONCLUSIONS No statistically significant differences were observed between 2 g of preoperative amoxicillin and an additional 2-day postoperative course , although adverse events were reported only in the additional 2-day postoperative group . Based on these findings , it might be sufficient to routinely administer preoperatively 2 g of amoxicillin to patients undergoing routine dental implant placement procedures rather than administering additional postoperative doses This study explored the necessity of perioperative antibiotics on survival rates of implants immediately placed and provisionalized into sites with infection . Subjects were 
    Output:
    
Only SDOAP is effective and efficacious at preventing implant failures , but it was not significant for postoperative infections following dental implant surgeries