The Efficacy of Three Different Oral Hygiene Regimens in Preventing Chemotherapy-Induced Oral Mucositis in Pediatric Patients Receiving Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis is one of the side effects developed post-hematopoietic stem cell transplant. This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of a mouthwash mixture (lidocaine, sodium alginate, sucralfate, pheniramine) versus hyaluronic acid and a solution of sodium bicarbonate in terms of healing time and weight gain in the treatment of oral mucositis in pediatric patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with hemato-oncological malignancies. METHODS: A total of 171 patients that received chemotherapy for the hematopoietic stem cell transplant were divided into three groups; group 1, treated with a mixed mouthwash of lidocaine, sodium alginate, sucralfate, and pheniramine; group 2, treated with hyaluronic acid; and group 3, treated with an aqueous solution of 5% sodium bicarbonate. Weight and mucositis scale scores derived from medical records of patients. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference in the mucositis scale scores between the groups on the transplant day and days 5, 10, 15 and 20 after the transplantation. At these measurement points, Group 2 (receiving hyaluronic acid) had a lower score, and Group 3 (who received sodium bicarbonate) had a higher score, especially on days 5 and 10 after the transplantation. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that hyaluronic acid is a more effective treatment option than the other oral care solutions that are frequently used for prophylaxis and treatment of oral mucositis.

Clinical effect of chlorhexidine and sodium fluoride on corrosion behavior and surface topography of nitinol orthodontic archwires.

BACKGROUND: Alterations in the mechanical properties of the materials utilized in orthodontic appliances could affect the working properties of the appliances, thereby affecting clinical progress and outcome. Numerous studies have confirmed the correlation between alloy corrosion and raised surface roughness, which has a direct impact on the working characteristics of orthodontic archwires. METHODS: Thirty nickel-titanium (NiTi) orthodontic archwires were utilized in this study. Patients were randomly selected and allocated into three groups according to the randomization plan; (The control group): subjects practiced regular oral hygiene; (The fluoride group): subjects used fluoride for intensive prophylaxis; (The chlorhexidine group): subjects used chlorhexidine. Representative samples were evaluated by SEM, and then SEM images with high resolution were examined using Image J software to determine the surface roughness and obtain the results for further statistical analysis. RESULTS: Our findings indicated a significant difference was found between the three groups regarding the anterior and posterior parts between the control and the two other groups and a non-significant difference between NaF and CHX groups. Overall, the p-value for group comparisons was 0.000 for both parts, indicating a highly significant difference especially between the control and NaF groups. CONCLUSION: Mouthwashes containing sodium fluoride demonstrated more significant surface alterations than the control and CHX groups and should be prescribed in accordance with orthodontic materials to reduce side effects.

Efficacy of a mouthwash containing ε-poly-L-lysine, funme peptides and domiphen in reducing halitosis and supragingival plaque: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antibacterial effectiveness of a combination of ε-poly-L-lysine (ε-PL), funme peptide (FP) as well as domiphen against oral pathogens, and assess the efficacy of a BOP® mouthwash supplemented with this combination in reducing halitosis and supragingival plaque in a clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of the compound against Fusobacterium nucleatum, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Streptococcus mutans, and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans were determined by the gradient dilution method. Subsequently, the CCK-8 assay was used to detect the toxicity of mouthwash on human gingival fibroblastst, and the effectiveness in reducing halitosis and supragingival plaque of the mouthwash supplemented with the combination was analyzed by a randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled clinical trial. RESULTS: The combination exhibited significant inhibitory effects on tested oral pathogens with the MIC < 1.56% (v/v) and the MBC < 3.13% (v/v), and the mouthwash containing this combination did not inhibit the viability of human gingival fibroblasts at the test concentrations. The clinical trial showed that the test group displayed notably lower volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs) at 0, 10, 24 h, and 7 d post-mouthwash (P < 0.05), compared with the baseline. After 7 days, the VSC levels of the and control groups were reduced by 50.27% and 32.12%, respectively, and notably cutting severe halitosis by 57.03% in the test group. Additionally, the Plaque Index (PLI) of the test and control group decreased by 54.55% and 8.38%, respectively, and there was a significant difference in PLI between the two groups after 7 days (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ε-PL, FP and domiphen demonstrated potent inhibitory and bactericidal effects against the tested oral pathogens, and the newly formulated mouthwash added with the combination exhibited anti-dental plaque and anti-halitosis properties in a clinical trial and was safe. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The randomized controlled clinical trial was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR2300073816, Date: 21/07/2023).

Quantitative analysis of the effects of brushing, flossing, and mouthrinsing on supragingival and subgingival plaque microbiota: 12-week clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Translational microbiome research using next-generation DNA sequencing is challenging due to the semi-qualitative nature of relative abundance data. A novel method for quantitative analysis was applied in this 12-week clinical trial to understand the mechanical vs. chemotherapeutic actions of brushing, flossing, and mouthrinsing against the supragingival dental plaque microbiome. Enumeration of viable bacteria using vPCR was also applied on supragingival plaque for validation and on subgingival plaque to evaluate interventional effects below the gingival margin. METHODS: Subjects with gingivitis were enrolled in a single center, examiner-blind, virtually supervised, parallel group controlled clinical trial. Subjects with gingivitis were randomized into brushing only (B); brushing and flossing (BF); brushing and rinsing with Listerine® Cool Mint® Antiseptic (BA); brushing and rinsing with Listerine® Cool Mint® Zero (BZ); or brushing, flossing, and rinsing with Listerine® Cool Mint® Zero (BFZ). All subjects brushed twice daily for 1 min with a sodium monofluorophosphate toothpaste and a soft-bristled toothbrush. Subjects who flossed used unflavored waxed dental floss once daily. Subjects assigned to mouthrinses rinsed twice daily. Plaque specimens were collected at the baseline visit and after 4 and 12 weeks of intervention. Bacterial cell number quantification was achieved by adding reference amounts of DNA controls to plaque samples prior to DNA extraction, followed by shallow shotgun metagenome sequencing. RESULTS: 286 subjects completed the trial. The metagenomic data for supragingival plaque showed significant reductions in Shannon-Weaver diversity, species richness, and total and categorical bacterial abundances (commensal, gingivitis, and malodor) after 4 and 12 weeks for the BA, BZ, and BFZ groups compared to the B group, while no significant differences were observed between the B and BF groups. Supragingival plaque vPCR further validated these results, and subgingival plaque vPCR demonstrated significant efficacy for the BFZ intervention only. CONCLUSIONS: This publication reports on a successful application of a quantitative method of microbiome analysis in a clinical trial demonstrating the sustained and superior efficacy of essential oil mouthrinses at controlling dental plaque compared to mechanical methods. The quantitative microbiological data in this trial also reinforce the safety and mechanism of action of EO mouthrinses against plaque microbial ecology and highlights the importance of elevating EO mouthrinsing as an integral part of an oral hygiene regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 31/10/2022. The registration number is NCT05600231.

Quantitative analysis of the effects of essential oil mouthrinses on clinical plaque microbiome: a parallel-group, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The rich diversity of microorganisms in the oral cavity plays an important role in the maintenance of oral health and development of detrimental oral health conditions. Beyond commonly used qualitative microbiome metrics, such as relative proportions or diversity, both the species-level identification and quantification of bacteria are key to understanding clinical disease associations. This study reports the first-time application of an absolute quantitative microbiome analysis using spiked DNA standards and shotgun metagenome sequencing to assess the efficacy and safety of product intervention on dental plaque microbiome. METHODS: In this parallel-group, randomized clinical trial, essential oil mouthrinses, including LISTERINE® Cool Mint Antiseptic (LCM), an alcohol-containing prototype mouthrinse (ACPM), and an alcohol-free prototype mouthrinse (AFPM), were compared against a hydroalcohol control rinse on clinical parameters and the oral microbiome of subjects with moderate gingivitis. To enable a sensitive and clinically meaningful measure of bacterial abundances, species were categorized according to their associations with oral conditions based on published literature and quantified using known amounts of spiked DNA standards. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed that both LCM and ACPM shifted the dysbiotic microbiome composition of subjects with gingivitis to a healthier state after 4 weeks of twice-daily use, resembling the composition of subjects with clinically healthy oral conditions recruited for observational reference comparison at baseline. The essential oil-containing mouthrinses evaluated in this study showed statistically significant reductions in clinical gingivitis and plaque measurements when compared to the hydroalcohol control rinse after 6 weeks of use. CONCLUSIONS: By establishing a novel quantitative method for microbiome analysis, this study sheds light on the mechanisms of LCM mouthrinse efficacy on oral microbial ecology, demonstrating that repeated usage non-selectively resets a gingivitis-like oral microbiome toward that of a healthy oral cavity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 10/06/2021. The registration number is NCT04921371.

Over-the-counter products in tooth bleaching: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To map and summarize the current scientific evidence concerning the active ingredients, effectiveness, and adverse effects of over-the-counter (OTC) bleaching products. DATA AND SOURCE: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for scoping reviews and registered on the Open Science Framework platform. STUDY SELECTION: Database searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus up to January 2024. All in vitro, in situ, and clinical studies evaluating the effectiveness and adverse effects of OTC bleaching products were included. A descriptive analysis of the included studies was performed. RESULTS: A total of 88 studies were included. Most of them were in vitro studies (n = 49), followed by randomized clinical trials (n = 28). The main OTC bleaching products identified were whitening or stain-removing toothpastes (n = 42), followed by whitening strips (n = 39). Most clinical studies indicate that whitening strips are effective in improving tooth color and providing whitening benefits. In contrast, the bleaching effectiveness of toothpastes, mouth rinses and whitening trays was mainly supported by in vitro studies. The main adverse effects associated with OTC bleaching agents were tooth sensitivity and gingival irritation. CONCLUSION: A wide variety of OTC bleaching products is available for consumer self-administered use. Clinical studies have mainly confirmed the bleaching effectiveness of whitening strips, while the validation for toothpastes, mouth rinses and whitening trays has mainly relied on in vitro studies. Nevertheless, the use of OTC bleaching products may result in adverse effects, including tooth sensitivity, gingival irritation, and enamel surface changes. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Some over-the-counter bleaching products may have whitening properties supported by clinical studies, particularly those containing hydrogen or carbamide peroxide. Nonetheless, clinicians must be aware of the potential risks associated with excessive self-administration of these products, which may result in adverse effects.

Oral mouthwashes for asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic adults with COVID-19 and salivary viral load: a randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized clinical trials suggest that the effect of using cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwashes on the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load in COVID-19 patients has been inconsistent. Additionally, no clinical study has investigated the effectiveness of on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash against COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label clinical trial to assess for any effects of using mouthwash on the salivary SARS-CoV-2 viral load among asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic adult COVID-19-positive patients. Patients were randomized to receive either 20 mL of 0.05% CPC, 10 mL of 0.01% on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide, or 20 mL of placebo mouthwash (purified water) in a 1:1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was the cycle threshold (Ct) values employed for SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load estimation. We used linear mixed-effects models to assess for any effect of the mouthwashes on SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load. RESULTS: Of a total of 96 eligible participants enrolled from November 7, 2022, to January 19, 2023, 90 were accepted for the primary analysis. The use of 0.05% CPC mouthwash was not shown to be superior to placebo in change from baseline salivary Ct value at 30 min (difference vs. placebo, 0.640; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.425 to 2.706; P = 0.543); 2 h (difference vs. placebo, 1.158; 95% CI, -0.797 to 3.112; P = 0.246); 4 h (difference vs. placebo, 1.283; 95% CI, -0.719 to 3.285; P = 0.209); 10 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.304; 95% CI, -1.777 to 2.385; P = 0.775); or 24 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.782; 95% CI, -1.195 to 2.759; P = 0.438). The use of 0.01% on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash was also not shown to be superior to placebo in change from baseline salivary Ct value at 30 min (difference vs. placebo, 0.905; 95% CI, -1.079 to 2.888; P = 0.371); 2 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.709; 95% CI, -1.275 to 2.693; P = 0.483); 4 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.220; 95% CI, -1.787 to 2.226; P = 0.830); 10 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.198; 95% CI, -1.901 to 2.296; P = 0.854); or 24 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.784; 95% CI, -1.236 to 2.804; P = 0.447). CONCLUSIONS: In asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic adults with COVID-19, compared to placebo, the use of 0.05% CPC and 0.01% on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash did not lead to a significant reduction in SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load. Future studies of the efficacy of CPC and on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash on the viral viability of SARS-CoV-2 should be conducted using different specimen types and in multiple populations and settings.

Efficacy of natural enzymes mouthwash: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Natural enzymes mouthwash has been proposed as salivary substitutes to treat xerostomia. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the mouthwash to treat xerostomia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A double-blind, parallel group randomised control clinical trial involving N = 49 adult participants with xerostomia was carried out. Intervention group received natural enzymes moisturising mouthwash (with active ingredients lactoferrin, lysozyme, lactoperoxidase and glucose oxidase); while control group received benzydamine mouthwash. Mouthwashes were repacked, labelled with specific code, and were given to participants by third-party. Subjects were instructed to rinse with the mouthwash 4 times per day at a specific period, for 2 weeks. Symptoms of xerostomia were assessed using Xerostomia Inventory at day 0 and 14; together with the assessment of Clinical Oral Dryness Score (CODS), and measurement of resting and stimulated salivary flow rate. RESULTS: 48 participants completed the clinical follow-up, and n = 1 had lost of follow-up. From the 48 participants, n = 23 received natural enzymes mouthwash, while n = 25 received benzydamine mouthwash. Intervention group achieved reduction in symptoms of xerostomia from baseline. Intervention group also showed significantly better improvements in the cognitive perception of dry mouth and oromotor function such as chewing, swallowing and speech of the participants; and reduction in waking up at night to drink water (p < 0.05). The CODS and resting salivary flow rate were also significantly improved in intervention group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Use of natural enzymes mouthwash improved signs and symptoms of xerostomia. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Natural enzymes mouthwash is potentially effective to treat xerostomia, well-tolerated and safe to be used by xerostomia patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05640362 on 7 December 2022.

Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of probiotic, Aloe vera, povidine-iodine, and chlorhexidine mouthwashes in the treatment of gingival inflammation: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemical plaque control with mouthwashes as an adjunct to mechanical plaque control with a toothbrush and dental floss has been considered an effective method for controlling gingivitis. The anti-inflammatory effects of chemical plaque control benefit the oral tissues by reducing inflammation and bleeding. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of probiotic, Aloe vera, povidine-iodine, and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwashes in treating gingivitis patients by assessing changes in their clinical parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study was conducted on 40 patients from our outpatient department, divided into 4 groups of 10 patients each: probiotic mouthwash group (group 1); herbal (Aloe vera) mouthwash group (group 2); povidone-iodine mouthwash group (group 3); and CHX mouthwash group (group 4). All participants were provided with the same type of manual toothbrush, the Pepsodent® toothpaste and a respective mouthwash for twice-daily use until the end of a 28-day observation period. Clinical parameters, such as the marginal plaque index (MPI) and bleeding on interdental brushing (BOIB), were recorded at baseline, and on the 14th and 28th day of the study period. RESULTS: All groups showed a significant decrease in the MPI and BOIB scores. The results were similar in patients who used a probiotic mouthwash and those who used a CHX mouthwash. A comparable change in the mean scores was observed among the herbal and povidone-iodine groups from baseline to day 28. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of chronic gingivitis patients,a probiotic mouthwash was nearly as effective as CHX in reducing the plaque and bleeding scores. It showed better results in all clinical parameters than herbal and povidone-iodine mouthwashes. Using a mouthwash along with routine tooth brushing can help in treating gingivitis and slow the progression of the periodontal disease.

Do oral antiseptics used in the dental routine have anti-viral efficacy? a systematic review of in vitro studies / Os antissépticos orais utilizados na rotina odontológica têm eficácia anti-viral? Uma revisão sistemática de estudos in vitro / ¿Los antisépticos orales utilizados en la rutina odontológica tienen eficacia antiviral? Una revisión sistemática de estudios in vitro

Introduction: Mouthwashes play an important role in the dental clinic, but their role on viruses requires investigation. Objective:to review in vitro studies to identify the effect of different mouthwashes on the main viruses associated with routine dental care. Methodology:The following databases were searched in September 2023: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases; the Cochrane Library and the Virtual Health Library (VHL); and grey literature. In vitro studies that used mouthwashes to reduce the viral load were selected. The PICOS strategy was considered to define eligibility criteria: the Population (viruses involved in the etiology of oral infection), the Intervention (oral antiseptics), the appropriate comparator (positive and negative controls), the Outcomes of interest (reduction of viral load) and the Study design (in vitro studies). Results:Considering the eligibility criteria, 19 articles were included in this review. The efficacy of povidone-iodine (PVP-I), chlorhexidine, Listerine®, essential oils, and cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) rinses were investigated. PVP-I (0.23%) had its effects mainly associated with coronaviruses SARS(Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome),demonstrating a significant reduction in viral load after 15 seconds of exposure. Chlorhexidine (0.05%; 0.1% and 0.5%) was ineffective against adenovirus, poliovirus, and rhinovirus respiratory viruses. Listerine® demonstrated superior efficacy against HSV-1 and 2 viruses and influenza A, and cetylpyridine chloride also demonstrated virucidal activity against influenza A. Conclusions:The type, concentration, and time of exposure to antiseptics varied between studies. PVP-I and chlorhexidine digluconate were the most studied substances, butin general, PVP-I was more effective in reducing viral titers, especially concerning coronaviruses. Other antiseptics such as CPC, H2O2 and Listerine® have also shown significant reduction in viral load, but this is a limited number of studies (AU).

Introdução: Os enxaguantes bucais desempenham um papel importante na clínica odontológico, porém seu papel sobre os vírus requer investigações. Objetivo: revisar estudos in vitro para identificar o efeito de diferentes colutórios sobre os principais vírus associados ao atendimento odontológico de rotina. Metodologia: As seguintes bases foram pesquisadas até setembro de 2023: PubMed, Embase, Scopus e Web of Science; a Biblioteca Cochrane e a Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde (BVS); e literatura cinzenta. Foram selecionados estudos in vitro que utilizaram bochechos com o objetivo de reduzir a carga viral. A estratégia PICOS foi considerada para a definição dos critérios de elegibilidade: População (vírus envolvidos na etiologia da infecção oral), Intervenção (antissépticos orais), Comparador (controles positivos e negativos), os Desfechos de interesse (redução da carga viral) e o desenho do estudo (estudos in vitro). Resultados: Considerando os critérios de elegibilidade, 19 artigos foram incluídos para esta revisão. A eficácia da povidona-iodo (PVP-I), clorexidina, Listerine®, óleos essenciais e lavagens com cloreto de cetilpiridínio foram investigadas. O PVP-I(0.23%)teve seus efeitos principalmente associados ao coronavírusSARS (Síndrome Respiratória Aguda Severa),demonstrando uma redução significativa da carga viral após 15 segundos de exposição. A clorexidina mostrou-se ineficaz contra vírus respiratórios de adenovírus, poliovírus e rinovírus. Listerine® demonstrou eficácia superior contra vírus HSV-1 e 2 e vírus influenza A, e cloreto de cetilpiridinio também demonstrou atividade virucida contra influenza A.Conclusões:O tipo, concentração e tempo de exposição aos antissépticos variaram entre os estudos. O PVP-I e o digluconato de clorexidina foram as substâncias mais estudadas, mas no geral, o PVP-I foi mais eficaz na redução dos títulos virais, principalmente no que diz respeito aos coronavírus. Outros antissépticos como CPC, H2O2 e Listerine® também mostraram redução significativa da carga viral, mas trata-se de um número limitado de estudos (AU).

Introducción: Los enjuagues bucales son importantesen la clínica dental, sin embargo, su efecto sobre los virus requiere investigaciones. Objetivo: Revisar estudios in vitro para identificar el efecto de enjuagues bucales sobre los principales virus asociados con larutinaodontológica. Metodología: Las siguientes bases de datos fueron investigadas hasta septiembrede 2023: PubMed, Embase, Scopus y Web of Science; Biblioteca Cochrane y Biblioteca Virtual en Salud (BVS); yliteratura gris. Se seleccionaron estudios in vitro que utilizaron enjuagues bucales con el objetivo de reducir la carga viral. Se consideró la estrategia PICOS para definir los criterios de elegibilidad: Población (virus implicados en la etiología de la infección oral), Intervención (antisépticos bucales), Comparador (controles positivos y negativos), Resultados de interés (reducción de la carga viral) y diseño del estudio (in vitro). Resultados: Considerando los criterios de elegibilidad, se incluyeron 19 artículos.Se investigó la eficacia de povidona yodada (PVP-I), clorhexidina, Listerine®,aceites esenciales y enjuagues de cloruro de cetilpiridinio (CPC). PVP-I(0.23%)mostró sus efectos principalmente asociados al coronavirus SARS(Síndrome Respiratorio Agudo Severo), demostrando una reducción significativa de la carga viral después de 15 segundos. Se ha demostrado que la clorhexidina es ineficaz contra losvirus respiratorios adenovirus, poliovirus y rinovirus. Listerine® demostró una eficacia superior contra los virus HSV-1 y 2 y el virus de la influenza A, y el CPCtambién mostró actividad virucida contra la influenza A.Conclusiones: El tipo, la concentración y el tiempo de exposiciónvariaron entre los estudios. PVP-I y digluconato de clorhexidina fueron las sustancias más estudiadas, pero,PVP-I fue más efectiva en la reducción de los títulos virales, especialmente en lo que respecta a los coronavirus. Otros antisépticos como CPC, H2O2 y Listerine® también mostraron una reducción significativa de la carga viral, pero se trata de un número limitado de estudios (AU).

Comparative effectiveness of Propolis with chlorhexidine mouthwash on gingivitis - a randomized controlled clinical study.

BACKGROUND: To assess and compare the effectiveness of propolis mouthwash with chlorhexidine mouthwash in the reduction of plaque and gingivitis. METHODS: A single centre, latin-square cross-over, double masked, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 45 chronic generalized gingivitis subjects who were chosen from the dental clinic of MAHSA University, Malaysia. A total of 45 subjects were randomly assigned into one of the three different groups (n = 15 each) using a computer-generated random allocation sequence: Group A Propolis mouthwash; Group B Chlorhexidine mouthwash; and Group C Placebo mouthwash. Supragingival plaque and gingival inflammation were assessed by full mouth Plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) at baseline and after 21 days. The study was divided into three phases, each phase lasted for 21 days separated by a washout period of 15 days in between them. Groups A, B and C were treated with 0.2% Propolis, Chlorhexidine, and Placebo mouthwash, respectively, in phase I. The study subjects were instructed to use the assigned mouthwash twice daily for 1 min for 21 days. On day 22nd, the subjects were recalled for measurement of PI and GI. After phase I, mouthwash was crossed over as dictated by the Latin square design in phase II and III. RESULTS: At baseline, intergroup comparison revealed no statistically significant difference between Groups A, B and C (p > 0.05). On day 21, one-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant difference between the three groups for PI (p < 0.001) and GI (p < 0.001). Bonferroni post-hoc test showed statistically significant difference between Propolis and Chlorhexidine mouthwash (P < 0.001), with higher reduction in the mean plaque and gingival scores in propolis group compared to chlorhexidine and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Propolis mouthwash demonstrated significant improvement in gingival health and plaque reduction. Thus, it could be used as an effective herbal mouthwash alternative to chlorhexidine mouthwash. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was retrospectively registered on 25/07/2019 at clinicaltrials.gov and its identifier is NCT04032548.

Efficacy of povidone-iodine nasal rinse and mouth wash in COVID-19 management: a prospective, randomized pilot clinical trial (povidone-iodine in COVID-19 management).

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To assess the efficacy of 0.23% povidone-iodine (PVP-I) nasal rinses and mouth washes on detectability of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus and cycle threshold (Ct) values in nasopharyngeal swabs. STUDY DESIGN: This was an open-label, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. SETTING: The study was conducted in King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from August 2021 to July 2022. METHODS: Participants diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 were randomly assigned to one of three groups, with participants receiving either 0.23% PVP-I, 0.9% normal saline (NS) nasal rinses and mouth washes, or no intervention (control group). Nasopharyngeal swabs were taken 4, 8, 12, and 18 days after the first swab to measure the detectability of the virus and the Ct. RESULTS: A total of 19 participants were involved in this study. The mean viral survival was 9.8, 12, and 12.6 days for the PVP-I, NS, and control groups, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.046). The Ct mean values were 23 ± 3.4, 23.5 ± 6.3, and 26.3 ± 5.9 at the time of recruitment and 25.2 ± 3.5, 15 ± 11.7, and 26.9 ± 6.4 after 4 days for the PVP-I, NS, and control groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: When used continuously at a concentration of 0.23%, PVP-I showed promising results in terms of decreasing the pandemic burden by reducing the period of infectiousness and viral load. However, the use of PVP-I did not result in significantly different changes in the quality-of-life parameters in recently vaccinated and mild COVID-19 patients.

The use of mouthwash containing trimetaphosphate as an adjunct therapy to fluoridated toothpaste reduces enamel demineralization.

INTRODUCTION: The decline in dental caries has been attributed to the widespread use of fluoride (F). Two forms of presentation are fluoridated toothpaste (FT) and mouthwash (MW), widely used by the population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study aimed to evaluate in vitro the effects of combining FT and MW, whether supplemented with sodium trimetaphosphate (TMP) or not, on dental enamel demineralization. Bovine enamel blocks (n = 60) were selected based on initial surface hardness (SHi) and divided into 5 experimental groups (n = 12 each): I) Placebo Toothpaste (without F/TMP); II) 1100 ppm F Toothpaste (FT); III) 1100F associated with a MW at 100 ppm F (FT + MW 100F); IV) 1100F associated with a MW at 225 ppm F (FT + MW 250F); and V) 1100F associated with a MW at 100 ppm F supplemented with 0.4 % TMP (FT + MW 100F-TMP). The blocks were treated twice a day, undergoing 5 pH cycles over 7 days. Thus, the percentage change in surface hardness (%SH), integrated subsurface hardness loss (ΔKHN), and the concentration of F, phosphorus (P), and calcium (Ca) in the enamel were determined. The data were submitted to ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls test (p < 0.001). RESULTS: The 1100F group was statistically inferior to the groups associated with MW for %SH, ΔKHN, and the concentration of P and Ca in the enamel (p < 0.001). Blocks treated with FT + MW 225F and FT + MW 100F-TMP showed significantly lower %SH compared to the other groups (p < 0.001). The FT + MW 100F - TMP group exhibited the lowest depth mineral loss (ΔKHN), and higher concentration de P in enamel (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The adjunct use of MW with FT produces a greater protective effect in inhibiting enamel demineralization, and the supplementation of TMP to the MW with 100F provides a superior effect compared to MW with 225F. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This combination of treatments could be regarded as one of several alternative fluoride supplements for subjects at elevated risk of caries.

Effects of mouthwash on periodontal pathogens and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Periodontitis is known to be associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and gargling with mouthwash is known to reduce the incidence of periodontitis by inhibiting periodontal pathogens. However, the effects of mouthwash on oral and systemic conditions in patients with T2DM remain unknown. In this study, we investigated the effects of gargling with mouthwash on the number of red complex species, including Porphyromonas gingivalis, Treponema denticola, and Tannerella forsythia, and HbA1c levels in patients with T2DM. Patients were instructed to gargle with water for 6 months, followed by gargling with mouthwash containing chlorhexidine gluconate for the subsequent 6 months. At each clinic visit, saliva was collected and bacterial DNA was extracted to detect red complex species using the polymerase chain reaction technique. The HbA1c level was determined using a blood sample. The number of red complex species significantly decreased in younger or male patients who gargled with mouthwash. Furthermore, HbA1c levels significantly decreased in younger patients or patients with higher HbA1c levels who gargled with mouthwash. These results suggest that gargling with mouthwash reduces the number of red complex species and improves the hyperglycemic status in patients with T2DM, especially younger patients.

Efficacy of flossing and mouth rinsing regimens on plaque and gingivitis: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effects of combinations of mechanical (brushing and flossing) and chemotherapeutic regimens which included essential oils (EO) non-alcohol and alcohol-containing mouthrinses compared to brushing only in the prevention and reduction of plaque, gingivitis, and gingival bleeding. METHODS: This was a randomized, virtually supervised, examiner blind, controlled clinical trial. Following informed consent and screening, subjects (N = 270) with gingivitis were randomly assigned to one of the following regimens: (1) Brush Only (B, n = 54); (2) Brush/Rinse (EO alcohol-containing mouthrinse) (BA, n = 54); (3) Brush/Rinse (EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse) (BZ, n = 54); (4) Brush/Floss (BF, n = 54); (5) Brush/Floss/Rinse (EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse) (BFZ, n = 54). Unflavored waxed dental floss (REACH unflavored waxed dental floss), and fluoridated toothpaste (Colgate Cavity Protection) were used. Examinations included oral hard and soft tissue, plaque, gingivitis, gingival bleeding, probing depth and bleeding on probing. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, both BA and BZ and the BFZ group were superior in reducing interproximal plaque (30.8%, 18.2%, 16.0%, respectively), gingivitis (39.0%, 36.9%, 36.1%, respectively), and bleeding (67.8%, 73.6%, 79.8%, respectively) compared to B. The BF group did not provide significant reductions in interproximal plaque but did reduce interproximal gingivitis (5.1%, p = 0.041) at Week 4 and bleeding at Weeks 4 and 12 (34.6%, 31.4%, p < 0.001 respectively) compared to B. The BFZ group did not significantly reduce interproximal plaque, gingivitis or bleeding compared to BZ. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the addition of EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse to the manual toothbrushing and flossing regimen further reduces plaque, gingivitis and bleeding showing that addition of EO mouthrinses (alcohol or non-alcohol containing) to the oral hygiene regimen provides sustained reductions in plaque to help maintain gingival health after a dental prophylaxis. Dental professional recommendation of the addition of an EO non-alcohol containing mouthrinse to daily oral hygiene routines of brushing or brushing and flossing should be considered to aid supragingival plaque control and improve gingivitis prevention. STUDY REGISTRY NUMBER: NCT05600231.

Comparative evaluation of propolis mouthwash with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash as an adjunct to mechanical therapy in improving the periodontitis among perimenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of Propolis mouthwash compared to chlorhexidine mouthwash as an adjunct to mechanical therapy in improving clinical parameters in perimenopausal women with chronic periodontitis. METHODOLOGY: A double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted by recruiting 144 subjects with mild to moderate chronic periodontitis. After scaling and root planning, subjects were allocated to two treatment groups: 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash and 20% propolis mouthwash twice daily for six weeks. Clinical parameters such as pocket probing depth (PPD), clinical attachment loss (CAL) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were analysed at baseline, six weeks, and 12 weeks. RESULT: The mean value of PPD in the propolis group was 4.67 at baseline, reduced to 4.01 at six weeks and 3.59 at 12 weeks. While in the chlorhexidine group, the baseline value of 4.65 reduced to 4.44 and 4.25 at six weeks and 12 weeks, respectively. The baseline value of the mean CAL in the propolis group was 4.45. This value was reduced to 4.15 at six weeks and 3.77 at 12 weeks. For the chlorhexidine group, the baseline value of CAL was 4.80, which was reduced to 4.50 and 4.19 at six weeks and 12 weeks. The mean value of bleeding on probing in the propolis group was 77.20, which decreased to 46.30 at six weeks and 14.60 at the final visit. In the chlorhexidine group, the mean value of 77.30 was reduced to 49.60 and 22.80 at subsequent visits. CONCLUSION: This study concludes that both propolis and chlorhexidine mouthwash positively improve clinical parameters; however, propolis is significantly more effective in improving BOP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ID: NCT05870059, Date of Registration: 02/02/2022. ( https://beta. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT05870059 ).

Use of over-the-counter mouthwashes as an additional measure in individual oral prophylaxis on adults with plaque-induced gingivitis: a double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Plaque-induced gingivitis is a chronic inflammatory condition characterized by complete reversibility of tissue damage once the periodontal biofilm has been disorganised. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of two commercially available mouthwashes (MWs) versus a chlorhexidine (CHX) 0.12% MW in reducing gingival bleeding (GB) in adults with plaque-induced gingivitis. METHODS: The present study was a double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial involving 6492 gingival sites (i.e. 39 subjects × 28 teeth × 6 sites/tooth) aged 18-75 years. During a 2-week period, subjects were randomized to receive MWs: a control CHX 0.12% MW (group C, 1818 sites); a MW test containing CHX 0.09% + Citrox®/P complex (group CX, 2628 sites); a MW test based on natural compounds (group P, 2016 sites). GB was assessed at the inclusion visit (T0) and after 2 weeks of MW use (T1). Analyses of GB were compared between groups and then restricted to subjects with bleeding sites between 10 and 30% (moderate gingivitis) or ≥ 30% (severe gingivitis) at T0. Pairwise comparisons were made between groups and logistic regression was used to identify correlates of GB (T1). RESULTS: For total bleeding site analysis, GB reduction between T0 and T1 ranged from 23% (C), 26% (CX) and 36% (P), respectively (all p < 0.05). Multiple comparison between groups showed that group C was significantly less effective (p < 0.05) than groups CX and P. Splitting the analysis, in patients with severe gingivitis (≥ 30% bleeding sites at T0), all MWs had a positive effect on GB with a reduction at T1 of 36% (C), 33% (CX) and 42% (P), respectively. While GB reduction between T0 and T1, was significant for all groups, the comparison among groups showed no significant difference between group C and CX, whereas the improvement was significant for group P. On the other hand, in adults with moderate gingivitis (< 30% bleeding sites at T0), only CX and P had a positive effect on GB reduction at T1(9% in CX and 2% in P, respectively), although the differences between the three groups were not significant. CONCLUSION: The daily use of MWs with natural components (groups P and CX) for 2 weeks should be considered positively as an adjunct to individual oral prophylaxis to reduce GB compared to the control MW containing CHX 0.12% (group C) in healthy adults with plaque-induced gingivitis. For subjects with severe gingivitis, it is advisable to first use natural MW (P) and then MW based on CHX 0.09% with natural components (CX), compared to MW with CHX 0.12% (C). For adults with moderate gingivitis, P and CX can be advisable, even if no definitive recommendations can be drawn. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622000215729, 07/02/2022.

Carbohydrate mouth rinse improves performance of mentally fatigued cyclists despite null effects on psychological responses.

Mental fatigue reduces exercise performance through an impaired psychological response such as increased perceived exertion. Carbohydrate (CHO) mouth rinses improve exercise performance and perceived exertion likely due to an improved activation in cerebral reward areas, then we investigated if the CHO mouth rinse-improved exercise performance in mentally fatigued individuals was associated with ameliorated reward-related psychological responses. We hypothesised that CHO mouth rinse would be beneficial for mentally fatigued cyclists mainly in high-metabolic disturbance intensities. After familiarization and baseline sessions, well trained cyclists (n = 20) performed a maximal incremental test (MIT) after mental fatigue induction. They completed the MIT either without mouth rinse (MF) or rinsing their mouth with CHO (MF+CHO) or placebo (FM+PLA) solutions at every 25 % of the MIT. Psychological responses such as ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), affective valence, emotional arousal, and motivation were assessed throughout the MIT, while performance was assessed as peak power output and time of exercise. Mental fatigue reduced MIT performance (P < 0.05), but CHO mouth rinse was effective to counteract this deleterious mental fatigue effect (P < 0.05). However, we found null effects of CHO mouth rinses in psychological responses above the VT2 (P > 0.05) such as RPE, affective valence, emotional arousal, and motivation. Correlational analysis showed a significant, but moderate negative correlation between motivation and time of exercise above the VT2 when participants used CHO mouth rinse. In conclusion, the ergogenic CHO mouth rinse effects on MIT performance of mentally fatigued cyclists were irrespective of ameliorated psychological responses to exercise.

Eligibility and efficacy of a CPC- and CHX-based antiviral mouthwash for the elimination of SARS-CoV-2 from the saliva: A randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

AIM: This study aimed at investigating the efficacy of a 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride-0.05% chlorhexidine (CPC-CHX) mouthwash in reducing viral load in the saliva as compared with sterile water. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were asked to dispense 4 mL of saliva. Half the patients rinsed for 60 s with 15 mL CPC-CHX, and the remaining patients rinsed with sterile water (control). Four millilitres of saliva were collected after 15, 30 and 60 min after rinsing. Quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) specific for SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein were performed. For ELISA, the intact (representing the active virus) to total virus load (I/T) was calculated. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 copy numbers/mL from RT-qPCR tended to decrease in the control group, whereas in the CPC-CHX group, an increase was observed after T30. However, mixed linear model analysis revealed no statistical differences between groups (p = .124), time points (p = .616) and vaccinated or non-vaccinated patients (p = .953). Similarly, no impact of group (p = .880), time points (p = .306) and vaccination (p = .711) was observed for I/T ratio values. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitation of this study, there was no evidence that the intervention reduced salivary SARS-CoV-2 viral load during the course of 60 min. Therefore, commonly used pre-procedural rinsing might not be clinically relevant.

Association between mouth rinse use and changes in blood pressure: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Previous randomized controlled trials have shown that the use of antiseptic mouth rinses not only eradicates oral bacteria but also disrupts their ability to convert nitrate to nitrite, which is the key molecule in regulating blood pressure (BP). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the association between the use of mouth rinses and changes in BP. METHODS: The PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from their respective inception dates to 18th December 2022 to identify potential interventional studies with information on the association between the use of mouth rinse and changes in BP. Five trials using a controlled, crossover design were identified for data analysis. RESULTS: The weighted mean difference was pooled using a random-effects model. The pooled results of five trials together showed that the use of mouth rinses did not result in a statistically or clinically significant increase in the systolic BP (SBP) (1.59 mmHg; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.15 to 3.33) or diastolic BP (DBP) (0.46 mmHg; 95% CI, -0.72 to 1.64). The trial sequential analysis did not present conclusive evidence supporting the association between mouth rinse use and BP elevation. CONCLUSION: Within the limits of the available evidence, our review and meta-analysis showed that mouth rinse use did not result in a statistically significant increase in the SBP, DBP, or mean arterial pressure (MAP). Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to the high degree of inconsistency across the studies.