Indications for the use of metronidazole in the treatment of non-periodontal dental infections: a systematic review

Abstract

Background: Dental practitioners are the largest prescribers of metronidazole. Antibiotics should only be prescribed when systemic involvement is clear and should be limited to monotherapy with β-lactams in the first instance. Objectives: To determine whether metronidazole used as monotherapy or in addition to a β-lactam antibiotic offers any additional benefit over β-lactam monotherapy in non-periodontal dental infections. Methods: Searches of Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Cochrane library and trials registries, forward and backward citations, for studies published between database inception and 2 August 2021. All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-randomized trials comparing either systemic metronidazole monotherapy or metronidazole combined with a β-lactam with β-lactam monotherapy for the treatment of non-periodontal dental infections in adults or children in outpatient settings were included. Results: Four publications reporting three RCTs comparing metronidazole with a β-lactam antibiotic were recovered. Studies were conducted in the 1970s-80s and aimed to demonstrate metronidazole was as effective as penicillin for the treatment of acute pericoronitis or acute apical infections with systemic involvement. Meta-analysis of results was not possible due to differences in measurement of infection signs. All studies concluded that metronidazole and penicillin are equally effective for the treatment of non-periodontal dental infections with systemic involvement. Conclusions: Metronidazole does not provide superior clinical outcomes (alone or in combination with a β-lactam) when compared with a β-lactam antibiotic alone for the treatment of non-periodontal dental infections in general dental practice. Guidelines should reinforce the importance of surgical interventions and if appropriate the use of a single agent narrow-spectrum β-lactam.