Effect of stannous fluoride and zinc phosphate dentifrice on dental plaque and gingivitis: A randomized clinical trial with 6-month follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare a stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF2) dentifrice with zinc phosphate (Colgate TotalSF) with SnF2 with zinc lactate and control fluoride dentifrices for gingivitis and plaque control over a 6-month period. METHODS: A total of 135 adult participants were enrolled in this study. After randomization and blinding of examiners and patients, enrolled participants were provided instructions for use of assigned dentifrice. At 3 visits (0, 3, and 6 months), various gingival and plaque indexes were collected to determine the clinical efficacy of a stabilized SnF2 dentifrice. These results were compared with a SnF2 with zinc lactate dentifrice and with a control fluoride dentifrice. RESULTS: A total of 135 participants completed the study. All groups reported statistically significant reductions in gingival inflammation and improvement in plaque control at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Both SnF2 dentifrices showed statistically significant reductions in all indexes compared with the control dentifrice (P < .001). However, the test dentifrice showed higher but nonsignificant improvements in plaque and gingival indexes compared with the other SnF2 dentifrice. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports similar efficacy of a test dentifrice to a commercial SnF2-containing dentifrice for plaque control and reduction in gingival inflammation and provides supporting evidence that the test dentifrice maintains its clinical efficacy with change of formulation. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This newly formulated SnF2 stabilized with zinc phosphate dentifrice may be of benefit to patients in controlling plaque biofilm and gingivitis.

Evaluation of a stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice on dental plaque and gingivitis in a randomized controlled trial with 6-month follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare a stannous fluoride (SnF2) dentifrice (Colgate TotalSF) stabilized with zinc phosphate with a sodium fluoride control dentifrice for gingivitis and plaque control over a 6-month period. METHODS: One hundred adult participants were enrolled in this study conducted in Chengdu, China. After random assignment and blinding of examiners and patients, enrolled participants received instructions for use of the assigned dentifrice. At 3 visits (baseline and 3 and 6 months), the authors measured various gingival and plaque indexes to determine the clinical efficacy of the stabilized SnF2 dentifrice compared with those of the control fluoride dentifrice (2 groups). RESULTS: Ninety-eight participants completed the study. Both groups (test and control) had statistically significant reductions in gingival inflammation and improvement in plaque control at the 3- and 6-month follow-ups. In addition, the test dentifrice showed statistically significant reductions in all indexes compared with the control dentifrice (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study's results show statistically significantly improved clinical outcomes for reduction of gingival inflammation and improvement in biofilm control over a 6-month period through the use of a SnF2 dentifrice stabilized with zinc phosphate when compared with results with a fluoride control dentifrice. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This newly formulated dentifrice improves gingival health and plaque control and thereby may aid patients in attaining improved oral health.

In vitro antibacterial efficacy of cetylpyridinium chloride-containing mouthwashes.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the ability of three CPC-containing mouthwashes to kill planktonic bacteria in an in vitro short-exposure assay. METHODS: This blind study was conducted on two common oral bacterial species: Aggregatibacter (Actinobacillus) actinomycetemcomitans and Streptococcus mutans. The following mouthwashes were tested: two containing 0.075% CPC and 0.05% NaF in an alcohol-free base, and one containing 0.075% CPC and 0.05% NaF plus 6% alcohol. Additionally, a 0.05% NaF-only mouthwash was included as a negative control. Bacteria were exposed to one of the test mouthwashes for 30 seconds and then washed thoroughly, serially diluted, and plated on appropriate media to determine viable bacterial counts. Viable counts were converted to a log reduction in colony forming units (CFUs) relative to the negative control. RESULTS: All three test mouthwashes included in this study gave a statistically significant reduction of > 3 log CFUs relative to samples treated with the negative control. CONCLUSION: All three experimental 0.075% CPC mouthwash formulas gave a > 99.9% reduction in viable bacteria of both species following 30 seconds of treatment.

Evaluation of the antiplaque efficacy of two cetylpyridinium chloride-containing mouthwashes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the efficacy in reducing dental plaque regrowth of two mouthwashes containing 0.075% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC), one with 6% alcohol and one alcohol-free, as compared to a negative control mouthwash without CPC, using the Modified Gingival Margin Plaque Index (MGMPI). METHODS: The study was a double-blind, randomized, three-way crossover, controlled design. Following a washout period, subjects reported to the dental clinic where they were instructed to brush their teeth, used their assigned mouthwash, and were scored by the examining dentist for plaque using the MGMPI method. Subjects were instructed to refrain from all oral hygiene for the next 24 hours, except for rinsing with their assigned mouthwash 12 hours post-brushing. After this 24-hour period, subjects returned to the dental clinic and were once again scored for plaque. This sequence of washout followed by mouthwash use and plaque scoring was repeated until each subject had used all three mouthwashes. An ANOVA was conducted to assess between-group differences. RESULTS: The two test mouthwashes significantly reduced plaque regrowth over a 24-hour period (p < 0.05) as compared to the negative control mouthwash. The difference between the CPC-containing mouthwashes was not significant (p = 0.4868). CONCLUSION: Two mouthwashes containing 0.075% CPC, one with 6% alcohol and the other alcohol-free, were found to be safe and effective in reducing plaque accumulation when compared a negative control mouthwash without CPC. In short-term studies, the MGMPI appears useful for evaluating the antiplaque efficacy of mouthwash products.

A comparative investigation to evaluate the clinical efficacy of an alcohol-free CPC-containing mouthwash as compared to a control mouthwash in controlling dental plaque and gingivitis: a six-month clinical study on adults in San Jose, Costa Rica.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of an antiplaque alcohol-free mouthwash containing 0.075% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) and 0.05% sodium fluoride (NaF), as compared to a control mouthwash containing only 0.05% NaF, in controlling established dental plaque and gingivitis after three and six months of product use. METHODS: This was a single-center, parallel-group, two-cell, double-blind, randomized clinical study. Prospective adult male and female subjects from San Jose, Costa Rica reported to the clinical facility having refrained from all oral hygiene procedures for 12 hours, and from eating, drinking, or smoking for four hours prior to their visit. Qualifying subjects who presented with Gingival Index scores (Löe and Silness Index) of at least 1.0 and Plaque Index scores (Turesky Modified Quigley-Hein Index) of at least 1.5 were allowed to participate in this study. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups according to their baseline gingival and plaque scores. In the first treatment group (Test), subjects used an alcohol-free mouthwash containing 0.075% CPC and 0.05% NaF, whereas in the second treatment group (Control), subjects used a mouthwash containing only 0.05% NaF. Gingivitis and plaque assessments, and examinations of oral hard and soft tissues were conducted after three months and six months of product use. RESULTS: One-hundred and ten (110) subjects complied with the protocol and completed the six-month study. After six months of product use, the Test Mouthwash group exhibited statistically significant reductions from baseline with respect to Gingival (33.5%), Gingival Interproximal (34.5%), Gingival Severity (63.2%), Plaque (33.6%), Plaque Interproximal (30.0%), and Plaque Severity (73.6%) Index scores. After six months of product use, the Control Mouthwash group exhibited statistically significant increases from baseline with respect to Gingival (6.9%), Plaque Interproximal (7.2%), and Plaque Severity (32.7%) Index scores. Furthermore, after six months of product use, the Control Mouthwash group exhibited reductions from baseline with respect to Plaque (6.1%), Gingival Interproximal (3.6%), and Gingival Severity (1.1%) Index scores which were not statistically significant. After three months of product use, the Test Mouthwash group exhibited statistically significant reductions in Gingival (25.0%), Gingival Interproximal (22.3%), Gingival Severity (38.9%), Plaque (26.1%), Plaque Interproximal (22.4%), and Plaque Severity (75.0%) Index scores as compared to the Control Mouthwash group. After six months of product use, the Test Mouthwash group exhibited statistically significant reductions in Gingival (38.1%), Gingival Interproximal (37.1%), Gingival Severity (63.6%), Plaque (36.5%), Plaque Interproximal (33.2%), and Plaque Severity (78.5%) Index scores as compared to the Control Mouthwash group. CONCLUSION: The results of this double-blind clinical study support that 1) an alcohol-free mouthwash containing a combination of 0.075% CPC and 0.05% NaF produces statistically significant reductions in dental plaque and gingivitis after three and six months compared to baseline, and 2) the alcohol-free CPC mouthwash provides a statistically significantly greater level of efficacy in controlling established dental plaque and gingivitis after three and six months of product use as compared to the Control Mouthwash containing only NaF.