Effectiveness of Oral Cephalexin-Clavulanic Acid, Cefuroxime, and Amoxicillin-Clavulanic Acid in the Management of Dental Infections: A Real-World, Retrospective, Electronic Medical Record-Based Study in India
Kalyan Banerjee,Ajay Kakkar,Kashif Ahmed Shamsi,Deepak Bansal,Priyesh Mathur,Nitin Madan Potode,Pankaj Pagariya,Sha Perveez Azher,Apurva Chaudhari,Ritu Mandal,Archana S Karadkhele,Neeraj Markandeywar,Shruti Dharmadhikari,Chintan Khandhedia,Amey Mane,Suyog Mehta,Sadhna Joglekar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-023-00406-x
Abstract:Background: Despite multiple antibiotics being available to manage dental infections (DI), there is lack of data comparing commonly prescribed antibiotics in India. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of cephalexin-clavulanic acid fixed-dose combination (cephalexin CV FDC) in contrast with amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (co-amoxiclav FDC) and cefuroxime among patients with dental infections (odontogenic) in India. Methods: This retrospective, multi-centric, observational, real-world electronic medical record (EMR)-based study was conducted between January 2022 and December 2022. The EMRs of 355 adults with DI receiving oral cephalexin CV, co-amoxiclav, or cefuroxime were categorized into two distinct groups: Group I (Test Group) with patients prescribed cephalexin extended release 375/750 mg along with clavulanic acid 125 mg; and Group II (Comparator Group) with patients prescribed co-amoxiclav 625 mg (500 mg amoxicillin + 125 mg clavulanic acid) or cefuroxime (250 mg/500 mg). Results: Toothache was the most common complaint, reported by 95.5% of patients, followed by swelling (46.8%), tooth sensitivity (35.5%), pus discharge (33.0%), redness and halitosis (30.4% each). Dental caries was observed in 81.1% of patients. Clinical improvement, defined as improvement/partial resolution of infection-related clinical signs and symptoms (composite measure of pain, swelling, fever, requirement of additional antimicrobial therapy) as per dentists' judgment, was recorded in 98.3% of patients with cephalexin CV, 96.8% of patients with co-amoxiclav, and 98.9% of patients treated with cefuroxime within 10 days. Time (days) to clinical improvement was numerically lesser among patients receiving cephalexin CV (4.6 ± 2.0) compared with cefuroxime (4.9 ± 2.1) and co-amoxiclav (5.0 ± 2.6). All treatments were well tolerated. Conclusion: Cephalexin CV was as effective as co-amoxiclav and cefuroxime, with faster clinical improvement and better resolution of certain symptoms.