Seema Roodmal Yadav1, Vineet Vaman Kini2, Ashvini Padhye3. 1. Post Graduate Student, Department of Periodontology, Mahatma Gandhi Mission's Dental College and Hospital , Kamothe, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India . 2. Professor, Department of Periodontology, Mahatma Gandhi Mission's Dental College and Hospital , Kamothe, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India . 3. Professor and Head of Department, Department of Periodontology, Mahatma Gandhi Mission's Dental College and Hospital , Kamothe, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India .
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) is an oxidizing agent with known bactericidal, viricidal and fungicidal properties. Its efficacy in reducing the halitosis has been established by previous literature. However, data evaluating its antiplaque property is scarce. Chlorhexidine (CHX) is considered as the gold standard and an effective adjunctive to mechanical plaque removal. However, it is associated with few reversible side effects. Therefore a study was conducted to assess the antiplaque property of ClO2 containing mouthrinse against CHX mouthrinse. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of stabilized chlorine dioxide containing mouthrinse and CHX containing mouthrinse in inhibition of tongue coat accumulation and dental plaque formation using a four day plaque regrowth model clinically and microbiologically in a healthy dental cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Single Center, Randomized, Triple blinded, Microbiological clinical trial was conducted involving 25 healthy dental students volunteers (11 males, 14 females). Two commercially available mouthrinse: Mouthrinse A - Aqueous based ClO2 mouthrinseFreshchlor(®) and Mouthrinse B - Aqueous based 0.2% CHX mouthrinse Hexidine(®) were selected as the test products. Subjects were asked to rinse and gargle for 1 minute with the allocated mouthrinse under supervision after supragingival scaling, polishing and tongue coat removal. After four hours, smears were taken from the buccal mucosa and tooth surface. On the fifth day from baseline of four day non brushing plaque regrowth model the samples were again taken from buccal mucosa and tooth surface followed by recording of plaque scores by Rastogi Modification of Navy Plaque index, extent of tongue coat by Winkel's tongue coating index and measuring tongue coat wet weight in grams. The samples collected were subjected to microbial analysis and the results were expressed as colony forming units (CFUs) per sample. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The Data was analysed using SPSS 16.00 and presented using descriptive statistics. Independent t-test was used for the comparison between mouthrinse A groups & mouthrinse B group. RESULTS: The plaque scores and Winkels tongue coat scores, wet tongue coat weight recorded on the fifth day after the use of the two mouthrinse didn't show a statistically significant difference. The CFU per sample from tooth and mucosa after four hours revealed low bacteria count with respect to mouthrinse B however the CFU obtained on the fifth day did not show a statistically significant difference between the two mouthrinse. CONCLUSION: The clinical antiplaque efficacy of CHX and ClO2 mouthwash is comparable and so is the efficacy in reducing the oral bacterial load.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) is an oxidizing agent with known bactericidal, viricidal and fungicidal properties. Its efficacy in reducing the halitosis has been established by previous literature. However, data evaluating its antiplaque property is scarce. Chlorhexidine (CHX) is considered as the gold standard and an effective adjunctive to mechanical plaque removal. However, it is associated with few reversible side effects. Therefore a study was conducted to assess the antiplaque property of ClO2 containing mouthrinse against CHX mouthrinse. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of stabilized chlorine dioxide containing mouthrinse and CHX containing mouthrinse in inhibition of tongue coat accumulation and dental plaque formation using a four day plaque regrowth model clinically and microbiologically in a healthy dental cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Single Center, Randomized, Triple blinded, Microbiological clinical trial was conducted involving 25 healthy dental students volunteers (11 males, 14 females). Two commercially available mouthrinse: Mouthrinse A - Aqueous based ClO2 mouthrinse Freshchlor(®) and Mouthrinse B - Aqueous based 0.2% CHX mouthrinse Hexidine(®) were selected as the test products. Subjects were asked to rinse and gargle for 1 minute with the allocated mouthrinse under supervision after supragingival scaling, polishing and tongue coat removal. After four hours, smears were taken from the buccal mucosa and tooth surface. On the fifth day from baseline of four day non brushing plaque regrowth model the samples were again taken from buccal mucosa and tooth surface followed by recording of plaque scores by Rastogi Modification of Navy Plaque index, extent of tongue coat by Winkel's tongue coating index and measuring tongue coat wet weight in grams. The samples collected were subjected to microbial analysis and the results were expressed as colony forming units (CFUs) per sample. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The Data was analysed using SPSS 16.00 and presented using descriptive statistics. Independent t-test was used for the comparison between mouthrinse A groups & mouthrinse B group. RESULTS: The plaque scores and Winkels tongue coat scores, wet tongue coat weight recorded on the fifth day after the use of the two mouthrinse didn't show a statistically significant difference. The CFU per sample from tooth and mucosa after four hours revealed low bacteria count with respect to mouthrinse B however the CFU obtained on the fifth day did not show a statistically significant difference between the two mouthrinse. CONCLUSION: The clinical antiplaque efficacy of CHX and ClO2 mouthwash is comparable and so is the efficacy in reducing the oral bacterial load.
Authors: Enrico Marchetti; Stefano Mummolo; Jonathan Di Mattia; Fabio Casalena; Salvatore Di Martino; Antonella Mattei; Giuseppe Marzo Journal: Trials Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Orsolya Láng; Krisztina S Nagy; Julia Láng; Katalin Perczel-Kovách; Anna Herczegh; Zsolt Lohinai; Gábor Varga; László Kőhidai Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 3.573