Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Antibiotics have been prescribed routinely in sialendoscopy procedures to reduce the risk of postoperative infection, despite the limited evidence supporting this practice. Being necessary to assess the need for antibiotics in Sialendoscopy, aiming to provide evidence-based guidance to clinicians regarding antibiotic administration in this procedure.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the of prophylactic antibiotics in Sialendoscopy was designed.
RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were included in this study, including 57 females (71.8%) and 23 males (28.8%). In terms of prophylaxis, 36 patients (45%) received prophylactic treatment, and 44 patients (55%) did not. The occurrence of infectious events was observed in 2 patients (5.6%) with prophylaxis and 4 patients (9.1%) without prophylaxis. However, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.556).
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our prospective, randomized clinical trial aimed to address the debate regarding the use of prophylactic antibiotics in sialendoscopy. Our study\'s findings suggest that the routine use antibiotics may not be necessary to prevent postoperative infections in sialendoscopy procedures. These results have important implications for clinical practice, potentially reducing the unnecessary use of antibiotics and addressing concerns related to antibiotic resistance and adverse drug reactions.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the of prophylactic antibiotics in Sialendoscopy was designed.
RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were included in this study, including 57 females (71.8%) and 23 males (28.8%). In terms of prophylaxis, 36 patients (45%) received prophylactic treatment, and 44 patients (55%) did not. The occurrence of infectious events was observed in 2 patients (5.6%) with prophylaxis and 4 patients (9.1%) without prophylaxis. However, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.556).
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our prospective, randomized clinical trial aimed to address the debate regarding the use of prophylactic antibiotics in sialendoscopy. Our study\'s findings suggest that the routine use antibiotics may not be necessary to prevent postoperative infections in sialendoscopy procedures. These results have important implications for clinical practice, potentially reducing the unnecessary use of antibiotics and addressing concerns related to antibiotic resistance and adverse drug reactions.
摘要：
目的：在内镜手术中常规使用抗生素以降低术后感染的风险，尽管支持这种做法的证据有限。有必要评估Sialendowscopy对抗生素的需求，旨在为临床医生提供有关该过程中抗生素使用的循证指导。
方法：前瞻性，随机化，双盲,设计了对照临床试验，以评估Sialendospechs中预防性抗生素的使用。
结果：本研究共纳入80例患者，包括57名女性(71.8%)和23名男性(28.8%)。在预防方面，36例患者（45%）接受预防性治疗，44例患者（55%）没有。在2例（5.6％）预防和4例（9.1％）未预防的患者中观察到感染事件的发生。然而,这一差异无统计学意义(p=0.556).
结论：结论：我们的未来,随机临床试验旨在解决关于在鼻内镜检查中使用预防性抗生素的争论.我们的研究结果表明，在鼻内镜手术中，常规使用抗生素可能不是预防术后感染所必需的。这些结果对临床实践具有重要意义。有可能减少不必要的抗生素使用，并解决与抗生素耐药性和药物不良反应相关的问题。
方法：前瞻性，随机化，双盲,设计了对照临床试验，以评估Sialendospechs中预防性抗生素的使用。
结果：本研究共纳入80例患者，包括57名女性(71.8%)和23名男性(28.8%)。在预防方面，36例患者（45%）接受预防性治疗，44例患者（55%）没有。在2例（5.6％）预防和4例（9.1％）未预防的患者中观察到感染事件的发生。然而,这一差异无统计学意义(p=0.556).
结论：结论：我们的未来,随机临床试验旨在解决关于在鼻内镜检查中使用预防性抗生素的争论.我们的研究结果表明，在鼻内镜手术中，常规使用抗生素可能不是预防术后感染所必需的。这些结果对临床实践具有重要意义。有可能减少不必要的抗生素使用，并解决与抗生素耐药性和药物不良反应相关的问题。
