Literature DB >> 25003787

Antimicrobial mouthrinse use as an adjunct method in peri-implant biofilm control.

Vinicius Pedrazzi1, Elaine Cristina Escobar2, José Roberto Cortelli3, Alex Nogueira Haas4, Ana Karina Pinto de Andrade2, Claudio Mendes Pannuti5, Eliete Rodrigues de Almeida6, Fernando Oliveira Costa7, Sheila Cavalca Cortelli3, Sigmar de Mello Rode8.   

Abstract

Great possibilities for oral rehabilitation emerged as a result of scientific consolidation, as well as a large number of dental implant applications. Along with implants appeared diseases such as mucositis and peri-implantitis, requiring management through several strategies applied at different stages. Biofilm accumulation is associated with clinical signs manifest by both tooth and implant inflammation. With this in mind, regular and complete biofilm elimination becomes essential for disease prevention and host protection. Chemical control of biofilms, as an adjuvant to mechanical oral hygiene, is fully justified by its simplicity and efficacy proven by studies based on clinical evidence. The purpose of this review was to present a consensus regarding the importance of antimicrobial mouthrinse use as an auxiliary method in chemical peri-implant biofilm control. The active ingredients of the several available mouthrinses include bis-biguanide, essential oils, phenols, quaternary ammonium compounds, oxygenating compounds, chlorine derivatives, plant extracts, fluorides, antibiotics and antimicrobial agent combinations. It was concluded that there is strong clinical evidence that at least two mouthrinses have scientifically proven efficacy against different oral biofilms, i.e., chlorhexidine digluconate and essential oils; however, 0.12% chlorhexidine digluconate presents a number of unwanted side effects and should be prescribed with caution. Chemical agents seem beneficial in controlling peri-implant inflammation, although they require further investigation. We recommend a scientifically proven antiseptic, with significant short and long term efficacy and with no unwanted side effects, for the prevention and/or treatment of peri-implant disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25003787     DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2014.vol28.0022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Braz Oral Res        ISSN: 1806-8324


  4 in total

Review 1.  To what extent should dental implant placement be adopted as a standard for diabetic patients?

Authors:  Ahmed S Alzahrani; Hassan H Abed
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.484

2.  Microbiological and SEM-EDS Evaluation of Titanium Surfaces Exposed to Periodontal Gel: In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Sara Bernardi; Serena Bianchi; Anna Rita Tomei; Maria Adelaide Continenza; Guido Macchiarelli
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-05-04       Impact factor: 3.623

3.  Long-term evaluation of the prognosis of super hydrophilic surface treated CA implants: a retrospective clinical study.

Authors:  Min-Joong Kim; Il-Hyung Kim; Na-Hee Chang; Young-Kyun Kim
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2022-03-29       Impact factor: 2.757

Review 4.  Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy to Control Clinically Relevant Biofilm Infections.

Authors:  Xiaoqing Hu; Ying-Ying Huang; Yuguang Wang; Xiaoyuan Wang; Michael R Hamblin
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 5.640

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.