A new method of choice for organoleptic scoring: The negative-pressure technique.

AIM: To examine an organoleptic scoring method (OLS) whereby the sample is collected by negative pressure in a syringe and is subsequently smelled and rated away from the patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of 476 patients visiting a specialized halitosis clinic in Leuven (Belgium) were reviewed retrospectively. Organoleptic (with the classic and with the negative-pressure method) and instrumental (with the Halimeter® and OralChroma™ ) ratings of breath odour were retrieved from patient files together with the final diagnosis. The correlations between the different methods were examined (Spearman correlation coefficient) as well as the positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity and specificity of all methods. RESULTS: Both methods of OLS correlated similarly with the instrumental measurements (Halimeter® and OralChroma™ ). Analysis of PPV, NPV, sensitivity and specificity of both methods of examination showed that the negative-pressure method performed best. CONCLUSION: The negative-pressure method is a valid method for organoleptic scoring of the breath odour and performs as good as the classic organoleptic method.

Periodontal diseases as a source of halitosis: a review of the evidence and treatment approaches for dentists and dental hygienists.

Bad breath (halitosis) is an important social complaint. In most cases (≥90%), the cause of halitosis can be found within the oral cavity. Under this circumstance, the term oral malodor applies. It affects both healthy and periodontally diseased individuals. Oral malodor is mainly caused by a microbial degradation of both sulfur-containing and nonsulfur-containing amino acids into volatile, bad-smelling gases. Anaerobic gram-negative bacteria, the same species that have been linked to periodontal diseases, are especially involved in this process, explaining why clinicians often associate oral malodor with periodontitis. Some volatile organic compounds render patients more susceptible to periodontitis and this supports the malodor-periodontitis link. This review investigates the interaction between oral malodor and periodontal diseases. Pro and con arguments regarding the mechanisms of halitosis and clinical implications will be presented. In general, however, the impact of tongue coatings has been found to be the dominant factor, besides gingivitis and periodontitis. The last part of this review discusses the treatment of bad breath, with different options.

Treatment of oral malodour. Medium-term efficacy of mechanical and/or chemical agents: a systematic review.

FOCUSED QUESTION: What is the effect of a dentifrice (DF), a mouthwash (MW), tongue cleaning (TC), or any combination of these as adjunct to toothbrushing on intra-oral malodour and tongue coating as compared to toothbrushing alone in systemically healthy patients, when used for a minimum follow-up period of 2 weeks? MATERIAL AND METHODS: The MEDLINE-PubMed, Cochrane-CENTRAL and EMBASE databases were searched up to August 2014. Measurements of Volatile Sulphur Compounds and organoleptic scores of oral malodour were selected as outcome variables. Data were extracted and a descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS: Independent screening of 1054 unique papers resulted in 12 eligible clinical trials with a medium-term (≥2 weeks) duration. The majority of studies provided a significant reduction in oral malodour when evaluating products with an active ingredient (incorporated into a DF or a MW) used adjunctively to toothbrushing. The added value of tongue cleaning over a MW was evaluated in one study. CONCLUSION: Due to very limited evidence, the potential effect of a specifically formulated dentifrice, a mouthwash or a tongue scraper for treating oral malodour is, in general, unclear. For mouthwashes containing the active ingredients chlorhexidine + cetylpyridinium chloride + zinc (CHX + CPC + Zn) and zinc chloride + cetylpyridinium chloride (ZnCl + CPC) most evidence was available. The strength of a recommendation to use these products was graded to be 'weak'.

Usefulness of a new malodour-compound detection portable device in oral malodour diagnosis.

A new device (BB Checker) able to detect malodour compounds has recently been made available. This retrospective analysis aimed at evaluating the usefulness of this device as adjunct tool for the diagnosis of oral malodour. Data from 100 consecutive volunteers with bad breath complaints attending their first consultation at a halitosis clinic were analysed. In addition to the standard protocol (organoleptic ratings from mouth and nose air, and from tongue coating when present; OralChroma and Halimeter measurements from mouth air; and intra-oral examinations), oral, exhaled and nasal air samples were examined with the BB Checker. We could not establish a correlation between the BB Checker values and the organoleptic scores, or the sulfur-compound levels determined by the OralChroma or the Halimeter (R < 0.3, p > 0.05). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the new device did not exceed the 50%. The correlations between the organoleptic scores and the OralChroma and the Halimeter measurements were good and in line with previous reports (R between 0.56 and 0.73). Our results do not favour the use of the BB Checker as adjunct tool in the diagnosis of oral malodour.