Michael Rosin1, A Welk, T Kocher, A Majic-Todt, A Kramer, F A Pitten. 1. Department of Operative Dentistry, Periodontology, and Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Greifswald, Germany. rosin@uni-greifswald.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: For various clinical applications, polyhexamethylene biguanide hydrochloride (PHMB) has been used for many years as an antiseptic in medicine. Recently, a 0.04% PHMB mouthwash was shown to inhibit plaque regrowth and to reduce oral bacterial counts. In this study, a 0.12% PHMB mouthrinse (A) was compared with a negative control placebo rinse (10% ethanol, flavour) (B), a positive control 0.12% chlorhexidine rinse (C), and a commercially available mouthrinse containing essential oils (Listerine) (D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was a double-blind, randomised 4-replicate 4 x 4 Latin square cross-over design in which plaque regrowth was measured. The in vivo antibacterial effect was assessed by taking bacterial counts from the tooth surface and mucosa 4 h after the first rinse with the preparations on day 1 and prior to the clinical examination on day 5. 16 volunteers participated and, on day 1 of each study period, were rendered plaque-free, ceased toothcleaning, and rinsed 2x daily with the allocatedmouthrinse. On day 5, plaque was scored and smears were collected according to the protocol. Washout periods were 9 days. Data were analysed using ANOVA with Bonferroni HSD adjustment for multiple comparisons (significance level alpha=0.05). RESULTS: The 0.12% PHMB mouthrinse (A) was significantly more effective in inhibiting plaque than the placebo (B) but no significant differences could be observed between A and 0.12% chlorhexidine (C), or between A and Listerine (D). Bacterial count reductions on the tooth surface with PHMB (A) were significantly greater compared to the placebo (B) after 4 h and significantly greater compared to B and D after 5 days. Chlorhexidine (C) was more effective than A after 5 days. On the mucosa, chlorhexidine (C) was significantly more effective in reducing bacterial counts than the other 3 treatments at both time points investigated. PHMB (A) was significantly more effective in reducing bacterial counts than the placebo (B) after 4 h and after 5 days, and than D after 4 h. CONCLUSION: Consistent with a previous study, a PHMB mouthrinse was shown to inhibit plaque recolonisation and to reduce oral bacterial counts, indicating that PHMB may find applications in the prevention of plaque-associated diseases.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: For various clinical applications, polyhexamethylene biguanide hydrochloride (PHMB) has been used for many years as an antiseptic in medicine. Recently, a 0.04% PHMB mouthwash was shown to inhibit plaque regrowth and to reduce oral bacterial counts. In this study, a 0.12% PHMB mouthrinse (A) was compared with a negative control placebo rinse (10% ethanol, flavour) (B), a positive control 0.12% chlorhexidine rinse (C), and a commercially available mouthrinse containing essential oils (Listerine) (D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was a double-blind, randomised 4-replicate 4 x 4 Latin square cross-over design in which plaque regrowth was measured. The in vivo antibacterial effect was assessed by taking bacterial counts from the tooth surface and mucosa 4 h after the first rinse with the preparations on day 1 and prior to the clinical examination on day 5. 16 volunteers participated and, on day 1 of each study period, were rendered plaque-free, ceased toothcleaning, and rinsed 2x daily with the allocated mouthrinse. On day 5, plaque was scored and smears were collected according to the protocol. Washout periods were 9 days. Data were analysed using ANOVA with Bonferroni HSD adjustment for multiple comparisons (significance level alpha=0.05). RESULTS: The 0.12% PHMB mouthrinse (A) was significantly more effective in inhibiting plaque than the placebo (B) but no significant differences could be observed between A and 0.12% chlorhexidine (C), or between A and Listerine (D). Bacterial count reductions on the tooth surface with PHMB (A) were significantly greater compared to the placebo (B) after 4 h and significantly greater compared to B and D after 5 days. Chlorhexidine (C) was more effective than A after 5 days. On the mucosa, chlorhexidine (C) was significantly more effective in reducing bacterial counts than the other 3 treatments at both time points investigated. PHMB (A) was significantly more effective in reducing bacterial counts than the placebo (B) after 4 h and after 5 days, and than D after 4 h. CONCLUSION: Consistent with a previous study, a PHMB mouthrinse was shown to inhibit plaque recolonisation and to reduce oral bacterial counts, indicating that PHMB may find applications in the prevention of plaque-associated diseases.
Authors: Shendra R Passic; Mary Lee Ferguson; Bradley J Catalone; Tina Kish-Catalone; Vladyslav Kholodovych; Wei Zhu; William Welsh; Robert Rando; Mary K Howett; Brian Wigdahl; Mohamed Labib; Fred C Krebs Journal: Biomed Pharmacother Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 6.529
Authors: Andrew J McBain; Robert G Bartolo; Carl E Catrenich; Duane Charbonneau; Ruth G Ledder; Peter Gilbert Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Sumaira Ashraf; Nasrin Akhtar; Muhammad Afzal Ghauri; Muhammad Ibrahim Rajoka; Zafar M Khalid; Irshad Hussain Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 4.703