Oral — Health, Diseases, Therapies, and Technologies

Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a severe and multifactorial condition historically linked to dental procedures. Current evidence shows that most cases arise from complex host–microbe interactions and biofilm colonization on damaged endothelium or intracardiac/prosthetic material, while the inappropriate use of antibiotics in dentistry promotes antimicrobial resistance. Objectives: To provide a narrative synthesis of contemporary evidence on (i) the relative contribution of dental procedures versus daily oral inflammatory burden to bacteremia and IE risk, (ii) the role of periodontal disease and the oral resistome in AMR, and (iii) the clinical and medico-legal implications of antibiotic prescribing and guideline adherence in dental practice. Materials and Methods: A narrative review was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, ResearchGate, and Google Scholar, complemented by manual screening of reference lists and relevant guideline documents. The search covered approximately the last decade (2015–2025) and included ESC 2023 and AHA 2021 guidance on IE prevention. Search terms combined concepts related to “infective endocarditis”, “antibiotic prophylaxis”, “dentistry/dental procedures”, “periodontitis/periodontal disease”, “bacteremia”, “biofilm”, “oral microbiome/oral resistome”, and “antimicrobial stewardship/antibiotic resistance”, using Boolean operators. Eligible sources included clinical studies, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, consensus statements and guidelines, and selected medico-legal literature relevant to dental decision-making and documentation. Editorials and non-peer-reviewed items without retrievable full text were not considered for evidence synthesis. Results: The reviewed evidence supports that spontaneous bacteremia associated with active periodontitis and daily oral activities may be more frequent than procedure-related bacteremia, suggesting that inflammation control and biofilm management represent a major preventive lever. Antibiotic prophylaxis should be reserved for a limited subset of high-risk cardiac patients as per contemporary ESC/AHA recommendations, whereas routine “defensive” prescribing in low-risk contexts provides minimal expected benefit and carries individual and societal harms (adverse events, microbiome disruption, AMR selection). Integrating periodontal care pathways with risk stratification and targeted antibiotic stewardship can improve patient safety and support public health. Conclusions: Dentistry plays a strategic preventive role in IE and AMR primarily through periodontal inflammation control, asepsis, and prudent antibiotic use. From a medico-legal standpoint, professional liability should be assessed on a process-based standard (risk assessment, adherence to updated guidelines, causal local treatment, informed consent, and traceable follow-up) rather than on outcome-driven hindsight. Full article