Search

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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of an essential oils mouth rinse and dental floss on dental plaque accumulation and gingivitis in interproximal areas., Methods: With informed consent, a parallel randomized controlled clinical trial was developed with 60 third-year dental hygiene students, randomly divided into two non-blind groups of 30 individuals each. For a period of 2 weeks, one group used an essential oils mouth rinse, according to manufacturer's instructions, and the other group flossed twice a day. Both groups received a toothbrush and fluoridated toothpaste for home dental hygiene care. A baseline dental hygiene appointment consisted of tooth scaling, prophylaxis and collection of the study data, using the Lobene modified gingival index; Saxton & Ouderaa gingival bleeding index and the Quigley & Hein modified by Turesky dental plaque index., Results: At baseline, there was no significant difference between the groups for interproximal gingival inflammation (P = .214), gingival bleeding (P = .829) and dental plaque accumulation (P = .860). After 2 weeks of treatment, no significant differences were found between the essential oils mouth rinse and dental flossing for reduction of interproximal gingival inflammation (P = .938) and bleeding (P = .307). Essential oils mouth rinse showed to be significantly better than dental flossing in reducing interproximal dental plaque accumulation (P = .006)., Conclusion: The use of an essential oils mouth rinse may be advised, as a complement, for patients unable to floss effectively, as it is more effective in reducing interproximal dental plaque accumulation than dental floss., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of Azadirachta indica (neem)-based herbal mouthrinse in improving plaque control and gingival health., Methods: Literature search was accomplished using electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE) and manual searching, up to February 2015, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presenting clinical data for efficacy of neem mouthrinses when used alone or as an adjunct to mechanical oral hygiene as compared to chlorhexidine mouthrinses for controlling plaque and gingival inflammation in patients with gingivitis., Results: Of the total 206 articles searched, three randomized controlled trials evaluating neem-based herbal mouthrinses were included. Due to marked heterogeneity observed in study characteristics, meta-analysis was not performed. These studies reported that neem mouthrinse was as effective as chlorhexidine mouthrinse when used as an adjunct to toothbrushing in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation in gingivitis patients. However, the quality of reporting and evidence along with methods of studies was generally flawed with unclear risk of bias., Conclusion: Despite the promising results shown in existing randomized controlled trials, the evidence concerning the clinical use of neem mouthrinses is lacking and needs further reinforcement with high-quality randomized controlled trials based on the reporting guidelines of herbal CONSORT statement., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: The purpose of this clinical study was to determine the antibacterial and antiplaque efficacy of a recently introduced octenidine-containing mouthrinse (Octenidol®) in comparison with established antiseptic mouthrinses., Materials and Methods: In a 4-day plaque-regrowth study employing a four-replicate cross-over design, a 0.1 % octenidine mouthrinse (Octenidol®/OCT-MR) was compared with a 0.12 % chlorhexidine mouthrinse (Paroex®/CHX-MR), an essential oil mouthrinse (Listerine®/EO-MR), and a placebo mouthrinse/P-MR. Plaque regrowth was assessed with a modified Quigley-Hein plaque index. The antibacterial effect was assessed by taking bacterial counts from the tooth surface and oral mucosa after professional tooth cleaning and after first rinsing with the allocated mouthrinse on days 1 and 5. Sixteen volunteers suspended tooth cleaning and rinsed twice daily with the allocated mouthrinse for 4 days., Results: All tested antiseptic mouthrinses were significantly more effective than the placebo mouthrinse in inhibiting plaque, but no significant differences were observed between OCT-MR and CHX-MR, OCT-MR and EO-MR, and CHX-MR and EO-MR. After 4 days, comparable bacterial count levels were found on both the tooth surface and mucosa applying OCT-MR and CHX-MR, which were significantly lower than that of EO-MR and P-MR., Conclusion: Octenidol® and Paroex® showed comparable antibacterial and antiplaque efficacy in the human oral cavity., Clinical Relevance: The recently introduced octenidine-containing mouthrinse Octenidol® may become a suitable alternative to 0.12 % chlorhexidine-containing mouthrinses such as Paroex®.

Dental plaque is a biofilm that forms naturally on the surfaces of exposed teeth and other areas of the oral cavity. It is the primary etiological factor for the most frequently occurring oral diseases, such as dental caries and periodontal diseases. Specific, nonspecific, and ecologic plaque hypothesis explains the causation of dental and associated diseases. Adequate control of biofilm accumulation on teeth has been the cornerstone of prevention of periodontitis and dental caries. Mechanical plaque control is the mainstay for prevention of oral diseases, but it requires patient cooperation and motivation; therefore, chemical plaque control agents act as useful adjuvants for achieving the desired results. Hence, it is imperative for the clinicians to update their knowledge in chemical antiplaque agents and other developments for the effective management of plaque biofilm-associated diseases. This article explores the critical analysis of various chemical plaque control strategies and the current trends in the control and prevention of dental plaque biofilm.

Unlabelled: In the 19th century, the mouthwash Listerine® was formulated from four essential oils. Later, the oils were replaced by their marker substances. To keep them in solution, 24-27% ethanol was added as a vehicle. This is an update of our previous review on the efficacy and safety of Listerine®., Method: PubMed was searched for clinical studies on the therapeutic benefits and safety of Listerine® from the end of 2011 to the end of October 2015., Results: Sixteen studies were found and extracted. Three of the four 6-month studies were of sound confirmatory design. Two of these investigated Listerine® and one Listerine Zero®. The evidence of effectiveness for Listerine®, based on the bulk of three confirmatory studies and numerous exploratory studies carried out so far, is strong, but only moderate for Listerine® Zero and poor for Listerine® Cool Blue. In the three safety studies identified, we found methodological flaws that biased the results., Conclusions: Evidence is accumulating that Listerine® is effective in improving oral health, but the absence of systematic toxicological studies means that an accurate safety assessment cannot be made., (Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: The purpose of this review was to systematically evaluate the effects of an alcohol vehicle solution (V-Sol) compared with an essential-oils mouthwash (EOMW) and if available with a water-based control (WC) on plaque, gingival inflammation parameters and extrinsic tooth staining., Materials and Methods: The PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL and EMBASE databases were searched. Where appropriate, a meta-analysis was performed, and difference of means (DIFFM) as calculated., Results: In total, 971 unique papers were found of which five met the eligibility criteria. The DIFFM of the meta-analysis of four 6-month studies showed that the EOMW provided significantly better plaque control (DIFFM = 0.39, P < 0.00001) and gingival inflammation reduction as measured by the Löe and Silness Index (DIFFM = 0.36, P = 0.00001) as compared to the V-Sol. Regarding extrinsic tooth staining, a small but significant difference (DIFFM = -0.08, P = 0.03) was observed., Conclusion: Limited data, but with a low risk of bias, were available to assess the potential benefit of the alcohol-containing V-Sol. 'High'- and 'moderate'-quality data were available for the analysis of plaque and gingivitis, respectively. Within these limitations, EOMW appears to provide a significant oral health benefit during the 6 months of use. The data retrieved for this review suggest that the essential oils produce an effect on plaque and gingivitis that extends beyond the V-Sol. Furthermore, the V-Sol proved to be no different from a WC., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to verify the influence of prebrushing mouthwashes on dental plaque removal in children., Methods: This study had a double-blind, randomized, controlled, crossover, 25-day experimental design, including 38 12- to 14-year-olds. Four solutions were used as prebrushing mouthwashes (Colgate Plax Magic, Listerine Cool Blue Agent, water and dye, and water) by each participant with seven days' washout. The plaque index was evaluated before and after tooth-brushing during the experimental period., Results: Intergroup comparisons showed no significant differences in plaque reduction among evaluated solutions (Friedman test, P>.78). Significantly more plaque was present before vs. after tooth-brushing (Wilcoxon rank test, P<.001), independent of the surface (buccal or lingual/palatal)., Conclusion: Use of prebrushing mouthwashes by children does not influence plaque removal by tooth-brushing.

Purpose: The aim of this investigation through post-hoc analyses was to determine the ability to achieve gingival health in the short term with daily rinsing with an essential oil containing antimicrobial mouthrinse., Methods: Conventional Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on whole mouth mean plaque and gingivitis scores were originally conducted to demonstrate efficacy of adjunctive use of Cool Mint® LISTERINE® Antiseptic (EO) compared to negative control [brushing (B) or brushing/flossing (BF)] in each of 5 studies containing a 4 week evaluation. The Modified Gingival Index (MGI) was split into 2 categories: healthy (scores 0, 1) and unhealthy (≥2). Data, reflecting subjects that completed 4 weeks of treatment from 5 studies, were evaluated to determine the mean percent of healthy sites and mean percent of more inflamed "affected" areas (MGI≥3)., Results: At baseline, the mean percent healthy gingival sites ranged from 0.1 to 3.2%. At 4 weeks, up to 29.3% and 16.1% of sites were healthy for the EO group and negative control group, respectively. Three and 6 month data from 2 of the 5 studies resulted in up to 39.6% and 62% at 3 and 6 month mean percent healthy sites per subject for EO and up to 17.2% and 15.6% at 3 and 6 months, respectively, for negative control. Virtually plaque free sites (PI=0, 1) at 4 weeks ranged up to 34.3% and 8.1% for EO and control groups, respectively., Conclusion: Significantly more healthy gingival sites and virtually plaque free tooth surfaces can be achieved as early as 4 weeks with use of an essential oil antimicrobial mouthrinse. This finding continues through 6 months twice daily use as part of oral care practices compared to mechanical oral hygiene alone., (Copyright © 2014 The American Dental Hygienists’ Association.)

Background: Effective oral hygiene has been proposed as a key factor in the reduction of dental plaque colonisation and subsequent development of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP). Listerine(®) oral rinse, while used extensively in dental practice has rarely been tested in mechanically ventilated patients. Sodium bicarbonate as an oral rinse has been more commonly utilised in oral hygiene regimens in intensive care patients., Aim: To test the efficacies of the essential oil mouth rinse, Listerine(®) (Pfizer) and sodium bicarbonate in the reduction of dental plaque colonisation with respiratory pathogens and the subsequent development of VAP., Methods: The study design was a prospective, single blind randomised comparative study of adult patients mechanically ventilated for at least 4 days. Patients were randomised to Listerine(®) (Pfizer) oral rinse twice daily, sodium bicarbonate oral rinse 2/24 or sterile water 2/24 (control group). All groups received tooth brushing 3 times a day. Dental plaque colonisation (primary outcome) and incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia (secondary outcome) were studied., Results: Three hundred and ninety-eight patients were randomised to either the Listerine group (127), sodium bicarbonate group (133) or the control group (138). Baseline characteristics were similar for all groups. There were no significant differences between the control and study groups in colonisation of dental plaque at Day 4 (p=0.243). Ventilator associated pneumonia was diagnosed in 18 patients. The incidence was, Listerine(®) group 4.7%, sodium bicarbonate group 4.5% and control 4.3% [OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.31 to 3.16; p=0.92]., Conclusions: Compared to the control group, Listerine(®) or sodium bicarbonate oral rinses were not more effective in the reduction of colonisation of dental plaque or the incidence of VAP. Given the low incidence of VAP, the common factor of a small, soft toothbrush as part of an oral hygiene regimen suggests possible benefit in mechanically ventilated patients., (Crown Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Brushing and flossing are the most widely accepted procedures, the 'gold standard', for controlling bacterial plaque, but these mechanical methods have limitations. Based on results derived from several clinical trials, essential oil (EO) mouthrinse (Listerine(®)) and a chlorhexidine mouthrinse have been accepted by ADA to be used as an adjunct to routine mechanical oral hygiene measures however, both of them are associated with side effects, therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the antiplaque efficacy of a new herbal formulation as compared to an EO and chlorhexidine rinse., Materials and Method: The study was a single blind parallel randomized controlled trial involving four groups. 48 volunteers refrained from all oral hygiene measures for 4 days, but rinsed instead twice daily with 10 ml of a herbal (HM), EO, chlorhexidine (CHX) or a placebo (PL) solution. Plaque index and plaque area (PA) was assessed on Day 4., Results: The HM and EO showed a significant inhibition of plaque regrowth compared to PL (P<0.001), but the lowest values of PI and PA were obtained with CHX. Statistically significant difference in plaque parameters was observed when CHX was compared to HM and EO, and HM to EO rinse., Conclusion: The new herbal mouthrinse had a promising plaque inhibitory potential but it not as efficacious as chlorhexidine in preventing plaque regrowth., (© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Objective: The objective of this randomized, examiner-blind, parallel, controlled clinical study was to compare the antiplaque/antigingivitis efficacy of an essential oil-containing mouthrinse (EO) to a new 0.075% cetylpyridinium chloride mouthrinse (CPC) using a two-week experimental gingivitis model with a 5% hydroalcohol rinse serving as the negative control., Methods: After signing informed consents and completing baseline examinations, 185 subjects were randomized into three groups. Subjects began supervised/recorded rinsing with 20 ml of their assigned rinse for 30 seconds twice daily for two weeks, with no mechanical oral hygiene permitted. Baseline and two-week assessments were conducted as follows: Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (PI), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and the Gingival Bleeding Index (BI). Analysis of efficacy variables (i.e., mean PI, mean MGI, mean BI, and proportion of bleeding sites derived from the BI) was performed using a one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA)., Results: Among the 182 subjects who completed the study, the EO rinse showed statistically significant reductions compared to the negative control within the range previously reported in this model; PI = 36.5% (p < 0.001) and MGI = 17.5% (p < 0.001). A 43.2% reduction in proportion of bleeding sites (p < 0.001) was demonstrated. Mean PI, MGI, and proportion of bleeding sites at two weeks were statistically significantly lower for the EO rinse compared to the CPC rinse (p < 0.001), showing 27.7%, 11.9%, and 30.0% reductions, respectively., Conclusion: An EO rinse provided superior antigingivitis/antiplaque efficacy compared to a 0.075% CPC rinse in this short-term clinical trial, and demonstrated efficacy within the range shown in previous studies using this model.

Listerine, a mouthrinse composed of a mixture of essential oils, was created in 1879 and was originally formulated as a surgical antiseptic. In spite of its known antimicrobial properties it was thought of as a product in search of a use and promoted as a deterrent for halitosis and as a floor cleaner. In the last several years Listerine has emerged as a bona fide therapeutic agent for reduction of plaque induced oral diseases. In contrast to the inconsistent history of Listerine, systemic antibiotics discovered in the 1940's were heralded as miracle drugs. However, the value of prophylactic usage of antibiotics has come under scrutiny as a result of increasing resistance and adverse reactions. Moreover, reports by both American and British professional societies have led to a re-evaluation of the relative risks associated with plaque induced bacteremia when twice-yearly visits to dental professionals are compared to daily activities. These new recommendations and revelations open the door for local antimicrobial approaches to reduce the challenge of plaque-induced bacteremias. These issues will be discussed in the context of Listerine, its intricate and complicated past, and its connection to current uses in oral health and beyond., (Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Assess the effectiveness of chemical-mechanical control associated with orientation and motivation for the control of dental biofilm in orthodontic patients., Methods and Materials: Thirty patients between 12 and 21 years of age wearing a fixed orthodontic appliance were divided into three groups. The control group (G1) received orientation regarding oral hygiene. The experimental groups (G2 and G3) received orientation regarding oral hygiene and diet as well as a hygiene kit and mouthwash; the mouthwash given to G2 was a placebo and that given to G3 contained essential oils (Listerine)., Results: In the comparison between T0 and T60, vestibular gingivitis was worse in G1 (p<0.05), with no statistically significant differences regarding lingual gingivitis and biofilm. G2 and G3 exhibited a significant improvement in clinical conditions. In the comparison between groups, G3 had undergone a significantly greater improvement than the other groups., Conclusion: The use of the commercial mouthwash, together with mechanical oral hygiene, orientation, and motivation, proved to be adequate conduct for the maintenance of oral health in orthodontic patients., Clinical Significance: The present study contributes toward the maintenance of oral health in patients who wear a fixed orthodontic appliance through the prevention of dental biofilm buildup.

The aim of this study was to determine the contribution of plaque and saliva towards the prolonged activity, also called substantivity, of three antimicrobial mouthrinses (Listerine®, Meridol®, Crest Pro Health®), used in combination with a toothpaste (Prodent Coolmint®). Volunteers brushed for 4 weeks with a toothpaste without antimicrobial claims, while during the last 2 weeks half of the volunteers used an antimicrobial mouthrinse in addition to brushing. At the end of the experimental period, plaque and saliva samples were collected 6 h after oral hygiene, and bacterial concentrations and viabilities were determined. The contribution of plaque and saliva towards substantivity was assessed by combining plaque obtained after mechanical cleaning only with plaque and saliva obtained after additional use of an antimicrobial rinse. Subsequently, resulting viabilities of the combined plaques were determined. The viabilities of plaque samples after additional rinsing with mouthrinses were lower than of plaque obtained after mechanical cleaning only, regardless of the rinse involved. Moreover, plaque collected 6 h after rinsing with antimicrobial mouthrinses contained a surplus of antimicrobial activity. Only Listerine showed decreased viability in saliva, but none of the mouthrinses showed any residual antimicrobial activity in saliva. The findings indicate that plaque left behind after mechanical cleaning contributes to the prolonged substantivity of antimicrobial mouthrinses., (Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Periodontal diseases are initiated by subgingival periodontal pathogens in susceptible periodontal sites. The host immune response toward periodontal pathogens helps to sustain periodontal disease and eventual alveolar bone loss. Numerous adjunctive therapeutic strategies have evolved to manage periodontal diseases. Systemic and local antibiotics, antiseptics, and past and future host immune modulatory agents are reviewed and discussed to facilitate the dental practitioner's appreciation of this ever-growing field in clinical periodontics.

Objective: A double-blinded controlled clinical trial with parallel groups was designed to investigate the effectiveness of a herbal-based toothpaste in the control of plaque and gingivitis as compared with a conventional dentifrice. The efficacy of Colgate Herbal over Colgate tooth paste was assessed in this study., Materials and Methods: Thirty subjects with gingivitis participated in the study. All participants had at least 20 natural teeth with no probing depths greater than 3 mm and a plaque index score of 2 or more at baseline. At baseline, the clinical parameters like gingival index, plaque index and salivary pH were estimated. Paired t-test was used to compare the difference within the groups and unpaired t-test was used to compare the difference between the groups at baseline and on the 30th day., Results: At the end of the study, there were statistically significant reductions in the gingival index and the plaque index scores within the test group. However, there were no statistically significant differences between the test and the control groups. The salivary pH changes were not statistically significant in the test group but were displaced more toward the acidic range in the control group., Conclusion: It was however concluded that the herbal-based toothpaste was as effective as the conventionally formulated dentifrice in the control of plaque and gingivitis.

The aim of this randomized double-blinded preliminary study was to evaluate the clinical and microbiological long-term effects of an essential-oil-containing mouth rinse as the active agent utilized in the "one-stage full-mouth disinfection protocol." Probing pocket depth and plaque and gingival indices were evaluated by the same calibrated examiner in all teeth of 20 moderate chronic periodontitis subjects. Presence of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Tannerella forsythensis were determined by polymerase chain reaction in nonstimulated saliva, tongue dorsum, and pooled subgingival samples. The subjects were randomized into two groups: full-mouth disinfection plus essential oils (Listerine) or full-mouth disinfection plus placebo. Clinical and microbial parameters were evaluated at baseline (T0), 45 (T1) and 180 (T2) days after therapy and analyzed using analysis of variance, Student t, and Wilcoxon tests (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between groups regarding clinical measurements at baseline. However, in the later examinations, T1 and T2, the test group always presented higher reductions of pocket depth, plaque index, and gingival index compared to the control group. The essential-oils group revealed significant reduction on occurrence of P. gingivalis in saliva comparing baseline and 45 days; this difference still remain at 180 days. The essential-oil-containing mouth rinse demonstrated beneficial effects on clinical parameters. Microbiological findings were less consistent. The results of this preliminary study suggest further investigations.

Objective: The purpose of the present investigation was to determine if antimicrobial mouthrinses with different formulations could affect the composition of the subgingival microbiota and clinical parameters of adjacent tissues in periodontal maintenance subjects., Methods: One-hundred and sixteen subjects, who had been treated for chronic periodontitis and were in a maintenance program, were randomly assigned one of four mouthrinses, to be used twice daily for three months. The mouthrinses were herbal 1, herbal 2, essential oil, and chlorhexidine. Clinical measurements and subgingival plaque samples were taken at baseline and at three months. Plaque samples were individually evaluated for 18 test species/taxa using checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization. Significance of differences between baseline and three months for both microbiological and clinical parameters were determined using the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test. Significance of difference among groups for change in clinical and microbiological parameters was determined using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), adjusting for baseline values., Results: Shifts in species proportions differed significantly for 9/18 test species/taxa among the four mouthrinse groups. Streptococcus and Capnocytophaga species were reduced most in the herbal rinse groups, while Veillonella parvula was reduced most in the essential oil and chlorhexidine groups. Actinomyces were also markedly reduced in the chlorhexidine group. Mean Plaque (PI) and Gingival Indices (GI) were reduced between baseline and three months in each group. Results emphasize that chlorhexidine (p < 0.001) and herbal (p < 0.05) rinses significantly reduced PI. Some subjects in each group responded better than others., Conclusion: All four mouthrinses tested produced shifts in the composition of subgingival microbiota, although the results differed among the groups. The observed microbial changes were accompanied by improvements in clinical parameters in the periodontal maintenance subjects.

Background: The side effects of chlorhexidine (CHX) have stimulated the search for alternative antiplaque agents such as amine fluoride/stannous fluoride (ASF) and essential oils (EO). The aim of the study was to investigate the plaque-inhibiting effects of two commercially available mouthrinses containing ASF and EO, respectively., Methods: The study was an observer-masked, randomized, 5 x 5 Latin square cross-over design, balanced for carryover effects, involving 15 volunteers in a 4-day plaque regrowth model. A 0.12% CHX rinse and a saline solution served as positive and negative controls, respectively. On day 1, subjects received professional prophylaxis, suspended oral hygiene measures, and commenced rinsing with their allocated rinses. On day 5, subjects were scored for disclosed plaque. The ASF rinse was tested at two dosages: 10 and 20 ml (ASF-10 and ASF-20, respectively)., Results: The ASF and EO rinses showed a significant inhibition of plaque regrowth compared to saline (P <0.0001), but the lowest plaque indices were obtained with the CHX product (P <0.01). There were no significant differences among products containing ASF-10, ASF-20, and EO (P >0.05). There was no correlation between the occurrence of side effects and the use of a particular rinse product (P >0.2)., Conclusions: ASF and EO mouthrinses exerted effective and similar plaque inhibition. The two dosages tested for ASF did not differ in plaque reduction. These findings, together with those from long-term trials, suggest that ASF and EO rinses may represent effective alternatives to CHX rinse as adjuncts to oral hygiene.

Purpose: To evaluate using digital plaque image analysis the antiplaque efficacy of oral care regimens including use of antimicrobial toothpaste in combination with antimicrobial mouthrinse., Methods: 16 subjects completed the study protocol including: (1) initial treatment phase, all subjects used a standard sodium fluoride dentifrice with 2x/day brushing, (2) second treatment phase, subjects were randomized to two treatment groups: stannous fluoride/sodium hexametaphosphate dentifrice or sodium fluoride triclosan/copolymer dentifrice; (3) third treatment phase, the group using stannous fluoride dentifrice rinsed with alcohol-free cetylpyridinium chloride mouthrinse and the group using triclosan dentifrice rinsed with essential oil mouthrinse. During each phase, plaque levels were assessed in the morning before toothbrushing (AM), post-brushing in the morning (PB) and in the afternoon (PM)., Results: Stannous fluoride dentifrice was superior to triclosan dentifrice in plaque growth inhibition between toothbrushing. Both mouthrinses provided additional plaque prevention benefits when used with antimicrobial dentifrices. The cetylpyridinium chloride mouthrinse and stannous fluoride dentifrice regimen was particularly effective, building accretive efficacy over time. Average plaque reductions exceeded 50% vs. sodium fluoride dentifrice alone. Chemotherapeutic dentifrices and rinses increase plaque control used alone and particularly in combination. The stannous fluoride-cetylpyridinium chloride regimen showed the greatest benefits.

Objective: To test the null hypothesis that adding Listerine mouthrinse to the standard oral hygiene regimen has no added benefit for orthodontic patients in maintaining proper oral health., Materials and Methods: Patients within their first 6 months of orthodontic treatment were assigned either to the brushing + flossing (N = 25) or brushing + flossing + Listerine (N = 25) group. Initially, all of the participants received a prophylaxis and instructions on how to brush and floss. Measurements were recorded for the bleeding, gingival, and plaque indices (BI, MGI, and PI, respectively) that provided baseline values (T1). Subsequent measurements were taken at 3 months (T2) and 6 months (T3). Mean BI, MGI, and PI at T1, T2, and T3 were compared statistically between the groups using repeated measures analysis of variance. The significance level was set at P < or = .05., Results: The response profiles for the BI, MGI, and PI over time were significantly different between the two groups. Patients who had Listerine in their daily oral hygiene regimen exhibited significantly lower scores for all three indices at T2 and T3 than the patients who only brushed and flossed., Conclusions: The hypothesis is rejected. This study shows that use of Listerine mouthrinse can reduce the amount of plaque and gingivitis in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Adding Listerine to the standard oral hygiene regimen may be beneficial for orthodontic patients in maintaining proper oral health, thus reducing the likelihood that white spot lesions and gingivitis will develop.

Purpose: This study was conducted to determine the effect of two mouthrinses elmex and Listerine on plaque accumulation in 12-year-olds., Material and Methods: 30 12-year-old children took part in the clinical study. They were divided into three groups. Group I (10 people) was given Listerine to home use. Group II (10 people) was given elmex to home use. Group III (10 people) did not receive any mouthrinses. Following indices were used in first and base study Plaque Index (PI), Approximal Plaque Index (API) and Sulcus Bleeding Index (SBI). The statistical analysis was performed using T test for related samples and Spearman rank order correlations., Results: Mean PI lessened in group I (Listerine) from 0.996 to 0.804 and group II (elmex) from 0.807 to 0.698. In group III it stayed almost at the same level. In all children values of API and SBI decreased after two weeks. Reduce of API in participants using Listerine was important statistically and it lessened from 57.4% to 48.1% (reduction by 16.2%). The other results of API and SBI were not statistically important. API in children using elmex lowered by 15.5%. Bleeding (SBI) in Listerine group decreased by 21.5% and in elmex group decreased by 24.5%. In control group diminish of SBI was only by 14.4%., Conclusions: In summary, this study has demonstrated that additional rinsing helped in reducing plaque and gingivitis in 12-year-olds but it is not as essential as motivation to everyday oral hygiene.

Background: The clinical effect of Listerine, a mouth rinse containing a mixture of phenolic compounds, is ascribed to its bactericidal properties. However, phenolic compounds are also known to interfere with the inflammatory process., Objective: The purpose of this clinical trial was to evaluate the effect of regular mouth rinsing with Listerine on plaque and gingivitis during a 2-week period of no mechanical oral hygiene., Material and Methods: Twenty-one subjects were recruited for the study. On Day 0 of each 2-week experimental period, the participants were told to abstain from all mechanical plaque-control measures but to rinse twice a day with 10 ml of the assigned solution (test: Listerine, positive control:0.1% chlorhexidine (CHX), negative control: saline) for 60 s. Each experimental period was preceded by a 2-week period including oral hygiene instruction, scaling and professional mechanical tooth cleaning. Examinations included assessments of plaque and gingivitis (Days 0 and 14), sampling of plaque and collection of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) (Days 0, 7 and 14). From the supragingival plaque samples, six different morphotypes of bacteria were counted using dark-field microscopy. The GCF collected was analysed with respect to the content of lactoferrin and albumin., Results: During the experimental periods, it was observed that significantly less plaque formed and less gingivitis developed when the participants rinsed with the Listerine mouthwash than with saline solution. However, significantly more plaque formed during the Listerine than during the CHX rinse period, while there was no significant difference in the development of gingival bleeding between the Listerine and the CHX rinse regimens. Significantly smaller proportions of motile rods and fusiforms were found in the List and CHX groups than in the control (Ctrl) group. The increase of the lactoferrin/albumin ratio in the List group was significantly smaller than that in the Ctrl group but significantly larger than in the CHX group., Conclusion: It was suggested that the effect of Listerine on gingivitis is more pronounced than on plaque formation. This indicates that the phenolic compound may have anti-inflammatory effects.

This clinical study evaluated the effect of rinsing with an essential oil-containing antiseptic mouthrinse, with or without 100 mg/kg fluoride ion, on the plaque metabolic acid production and plaque pH response after a sucrose challenge. This observer-blind, randomized study used a three-way crossover design. Twenty-four subjects rinsed with 20 ml of one of the following rinses: (1) essential oil (EO) mouthrinse, (2) essential oil mouthrinse plus 100 mg/kg fluoride, or (3) negative control, for 30 s, twice daily for 16 days. On day 17, 1 h after the last mouthrinse, subjects rinsed with 20 ml of mass fraction 10% sucrose solution for 1 min. Seven minutes after the sucrose challenge, supragingival plaque was collected from molar and premolar teeth. Plaque pH and metabolic acid ions were analyzed using a micro pH electrode and capillary electrophoresis, respectively. The results showed that after EO mouthrinse dental plaque produced 36% less lactate, 36% less acetate and 44% less propionate than after the negative control rinse. The dental plaque also exhibited a pH 0.42 unit higher after EO rinse than after the negative control rinse. These results were not affected by the addition of 100 mg/kg fluoride to the EO mouthrinse. From these results we concluded that this EO antiseptic mouthrinse, with or without fluoride ion, is effective in reduction of plaque acidogenicity after a sucrose challenge., (2004 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Mechanical methods of oral hygiene can be complemented by the use of chemotherapeutic mouthrinses. The authors sought to quantify the additional benefit provided by an essential oil-, or EO-, containing mouthrinse in reducing plaque and gingivitis in patients who brush and floss regularly., Methods: The authors randomly assigned patients with gingivitis to one of three treatment groups: brushing and rinsing with a control mouthrinse, or BC; brushing, flossing and rinsing with a control mouthrinse, or BFC; or brushing, flossing and rinsing with an EO-containing mouthrinse, or BFEO. Patients received a dental prophylaxis at baseline, and the authors followed them for six months., Results: Of 246 enrolled subjects enrolled in the study, 237 subjects were evaluable at the study's conclusion. After six months, the subjects using the BFEO regimen had statistically and clinically significant lower mean Modified Gingival Index, or MGI, scores and Plaque Index, or PI, scores than did subjects in the BC group (29.9 percent and 56.3 percent, respectively; P < .001). Subjects in the BFC group had statistically significantly lower mean MGI and PI scores than did subjects in the BC group (11.2 percent and 9.3 percent, respectively; P < .001). Subjects in the BFEO group exhibited statistically and clinically significantly lower mean scores for MGI and PI than did subjects in the BFC group (21 percent and 51.9 percent, respectively; P < .001)., Conclusions: This study confirms that for patients with gingivitis who brush and floss routinely, the adjunctive use of an EO-containing mouthrinse provides a clinically significant and meaningful additional benefit in reducing plaque and gingivitis., Clinical Implications: An EO-containing mouthrinse is an effective adjunct to regular brushing and flossing. Therefore, the BFEO regimen can be beneficial for patients with gingival inflammation.

Most adults brush and floss inadequately, and constant education and/or reinforcement is often required. Bacteria are usually left behind with mechanical oral health routines, and chemotherapeutic agents may have a key role as adjuncts to daily home-care. To date, two antiseptic mouthwashes have received the ADA Seal of Acceptance: Peridex (Zila Pharmaceuticals, Phoenix, AZ, USA; CHX, chlorhexidine) and Listerine (Pfizer Consumer Healthcare, Morris Plains, NJ, USA; essential oil (EO) mouthwash). CHX has a strong affinity for tooth and tissue surfaces, but can cause brown staining on the teeth and tongue. Patients must also wait until all traces of toothpaste are removed before rinsing with CHX. Long-term use of an EO mouthwash is microbiologically safe, with no changes observed in the bacterial composition of supragingival plaque, and no evidence of antimicrobial resistance. A number of trials have demonstrated the long-term plaque- and gingivitis-reducing properties of both CHX and EO mouthwashes. These studies clearly demonstrate that these agents have lasting efficacy, and can access hard-to-reach areas.

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of rinsing with an essential oil-containing antimicrobial mouthrinse with that of dental floss in reducing interproximal gingivitis and plaque in an unsupervised 6-month clinical trial designed in accordance with ADA Acceptance Program Guidelines., Materials and Methods: 319 qualifying subjects, aged 18-63, were randomized into one of three groups: essential oil mouthrinse (Listerine Antiseptic); dental floss (Reach Dental Floss); or a negative control rinse. At baseline, subjects received a complete oral soft tissue examination and scoring of the Modified Gingival Index (MGI), modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (PI), and bleeding index (BI). Following a complete dental prophylaxis and receiving flossing or rinsing instructions, subjects started on their respective regimen. They continued on their assigned regimen unsupervised at home, in addition to toothbrushing, and were reexamined at 3 and 6 months. The treatment groups were compared with respect to baseline demographic and clinical variables. The primary efficacy variables were mean interproximal MGI and PI at 6 months. Intergroup differences at 3 and 6 months were tested using a one-way analysis of covariance model with treatment as a factor and the respective baseline value as the covariate. In addition, the essential oil mouthrinse was compared to floss for interproximal gingivitis reduction using "at least as good as" statistical criteria., Results: 301 subjects were considered evaluable. There were no statistically significant differences among the 3 groups at baseline, with the exception of the essential oil mouthrinse group having significantly fewer AfroAmerican subjects than the other two groups. For the interproximal MGI, the essential oil mouthrinse and flossing were both significantly more effective than the negative control (P < 0.001) at 3 and 6 months. The essential oil mouthrinse was shown to be "at least as good as" dental floss for the control of interproximal gingivitis. For the interproximal PI, the essential oil mouthrinse was significantly more effective than the negative control at 3 and 6 months (P < 0.001) while flossing was significantly more effective than the negative control at 3 months (P < 0.05) but not at 6 months. The essential oil mouthrinse was significantly more effective than floss (P < 0.001) at both these time periods.

Objectives: For various clinical applications, polyhexamethylene biguanide hydrochloride (PHMB) has been used for many years as an antiseptic in medicine. Recently, a 0.04% PHMB mouthwash was shown to inhibit plaque regrowth and to reduce oral bacterial counts. In this study, a 0.12% PHMB mouthrinse (A) was compared with a negative control placebo rinse (10% ethanol, flavour) (B), a positive control 0.12% chlorhexidine rinse (C), and a commercially available mouthrinse containing essential oils (Listerine) (D)., Materials and Methods: The study was a double-blind, randomised 4-replicate 4 x 4 Latin square cross-over design in which plaque regrowth was measured. The in vivo antibacterial effect was assessed by taking bacterial counts from the tooth surface and mucosa 4 h after the first rinse with the preparations on day 1 and prior to the clinical examination on day 5. 16 volunteers participated and, on day 1 of each study period, were rendered plaque-free, ceased toothcleaning, and rinsed 2x daily with the allocated mouthrinse. On day 5, plaque was scored and smears were collected according to the protocol. Washout periods were 9 days. Data were analysed using ANOVA with Bonferroni HSD adjustment for multiple comparisons (significance level alpha=0.05)., Results: The 0.12% PHMB mouthrinse (A) was significantly more effective in inhibiting plaque than the placebo (B) but no significant differences could be observed between A and 0.12% chlorhexidine (C), or between A and Listerine (D). Bacterial count reductions on the tooth surface with PHMB (A) were significantly greater compared to the placebo (B) after 4 h and significantly greater compared to B and D after 5 days. Chlorhexidine (C) was more effective than A after 5 days. On the mucosa, chlorhexidine (C) was significantly more effective in reducing bacterial counts than the other 3 treatments at both time points investigated. PHMB (A) was significantly more effective in reducing bacterial counts than the placebo (B) after 4 h and after 5 days, and than D after 4 h., Conclusion: Consistent with a previous study, a PHMB mouthrinse was shown to inhibit plaque recolonisation and to reduce oral bacterial counts, indicating that PHMB may find applications in the prevention of plaque-associated diseases.

Background: The efficacy of an essential oil-containing antiseptic mouthrinse (Listerine Antiseptic, Pfizer) and an antiplaque/antigingivitis dentifrice (Colgate Total, Colgate-Palmolive) has been demonstrated in numerous double-blind clinical studies. This study was conducted to determine their comparative efficacy., Methods: Three hundred sixteen subjects with mild-to-moderate gingival inflammation and plaque received a dental prophylaxis and began their randomly assigned brushing and rinsing regimen in an unsupervised setting. Subjects brushed for one minute and rinsed with 20 milliliters for 30 seconds twice daily for six months. The three groups were L (control toothpaste/Listerine rinse), T (Colgate Total toothpaste/control rinse) and P (control toothpaste/control rinse)., Results: Subjects in the L and T groups demonstrated statistically significantly lower (P < .001) Modified Gingival Index, or MGI; Bleeding Index, or BI; and Plaque Index, or PI, at both three and six months than subjects in the P group. The magnitude of reduction for the L group was 22.9 percent, 70 percent and 56.1 percent, respectively, and for the T group, 20.8 percent, 58 percent and 22.1 percent, respectively. Subjects in the L group were not different from subjects in the T group in regard to visual signs of gingivitis (MGI), but were more effective (P < .001) than subjects in the T group in experiencing reduced BI and PI. No product-related adverse events were reported., Conclusion: Although the Listerine Antiseptic and Colgate Total antiplaque/antigingivitis products produced similar, clinically significant reductions in gingivitis (as measured by MGI and BI), Listerine, when used in conjunction with a fluoride dentifrice and usual oral hygiene, provided a greater benefit in reducing plaque., Clinical Implications: When considering an antiplaque/antigingivitis product to recommend to patients, clinicians should consider Listerine Antiseptic, in conjunction with usual oral hygiene, if more rigorous plaque control is desired.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of a fluoride dentifrice containing a fixed combination of essential oils (Thymol, Menthol, Eucalyptol, and Methyl Salicylate) in preventing caries in Sprague Dawley rats., Materials and Methods: The dentifrice contains 0.76% sodium monofluorophosphate (SMFP) as the fluoride source and a silica abrasive system. A fluoride-free placebo and a clinically proven USP dentifrice reference standard for SMFP/silica were included as controls. Three groups of 45 SDV-free Sprague Dawley weanlings were infected by a cariogenic strain of Streptococcus sobrinus and fed cariogenic diet NIH 2000 ad libitum. Animals were treated twice daily (once on weekends) with the assigned dentifrice using a cotton-tipped applicator, for 5 wks, after which they were terminated and caries scored using Larson's modification of the Keyes method., Results: Analyses of variance were used to compare inter-group means, the total E lesion score was the primary efficacy variable. Compared with the fluoride-free vehicle control, the experimental dentifrice and USP reference standard dentifrice produced a statistically significant reductions of 18.3% and 12.2% respectively for total caries score (P<0.001). Compared with the clinically tested USP positive control dentifrice, the experimental dentifrice produced a statistically significant reduction in the total caries score of 6.9% (P=0.028). The results of this study show that 1) both the new dentifrice containing essential oils and USP dentifrice are statistically significantly effective in reducing caries in the rat model, 2) the anticaries activity of the SMFP dentifrice is not adversely affected with the addition of essential oils.

Purpose: To determine the effect of 6 months use of an essential oil-containing (EO) antiplaque/antigingivitis fluoride dentifrice on the balance of the oral microbial flora and on the emergence of resistant microbial forms by analysis of dental plaque and saliva., Materials and Methods: The dentifrice essential oils consisted of a fixed combination of thymol, menthol, methyl salicylate, and eucalyptol. An identical fluoride-containing dentifrice without the essential oils served as the control. A subgroup of 66 subjects from a clinical trial population of 321 was randomly selected for characterization of their dental plaque microflora. Saliva was also cultured to monitor for the emergence of opportunistic pathogens. Supragingival plaque and saliva were harvested at baseline, after which subjects received a dental prophylaxis. Subjects were sampled again after 3 and 6 months of product use prior to clinical examination. Plaque was characterized for microbial content by phase contrast microscopy for recognizable cellular morphotypes and by cultivation on nonselective and selective culture media. Determination of the minimum inhibitory concentrations of the test agent against selected Actinomyces and Veillonella isolated bacterial species was conducted at all time points to monitor for the potential development of bacterial resistance., Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the microbial flora obtained from subjects using the essential oil-containing dentifrice and the vehicle control for all parameters and time periods except for the percentage of spirochetes at 6 months and for percentage of "other" microorganisms at 3 months. The EO group exhibited a lower adjusted mean for both parameters. Additionally, there was no evidence of the development of bacterial resistance to the antimicrobial activity of the essential oils or the emergence of opportunistic pathogens.

Background: Recent research has indicated that bacteria within a biofilm may undergo changes in susceptibility to antimicrobial agents when compared to planktonic forms. This study was conducted to determine the bactericidal effect of an essential oil-containing mouthrinse (Listerine Antiseptic) on dental plaque bacteria in situ., Methods: 1-day-old plaque in 17 subjects was sampled at baseline from the buccal surfaces of diagonally contralateral maxillary and mandibular bicuspids and 1st molars. Subjects were then randomly assigned either an essential oil mouthrinse or a sterile saline negative control and rinsed under supervision with 20 ml for 30 s. 30 min later, plaque was sampled from the remaining contralateral posterior teeth. Subjects repeated these procedures with their respective alternate rinse after 1 week. Pooled plaque samples from each subject at each sampling period were stained with a commercially-available fluorescent stain which fluoresces live and dead bacteria green and red, respectively. The stained plaque specimens were analyzed using computerized image analysis. A separate in vitro study was conducted to determine the relationship between the % red stain per sample and bacterial viability., Results: Analysis of vital stained plaque specimens indicated that following rinsing with the essential oil mouthrinse, 78.7% of bacteria were dead compared to 27.9% following rinsing with the negative control (p<0.001). The in vitro findings demonstrated that the % red stain per sample is reflective of actual bacterial kill., Conclusions: This study confirms the findings of previous in vitro and in vivo studies which demonstrated the essential oil mouthrinse to have significant biocidal activity against oral micro-organisms. These studies all support the primacy of a bactericidal mechanism in producing the plaque and gingivitis reductions observed in numerous clinical trials conducted on the essential oil mouthrinse.

Background: Clinical studies in which antimicrobial mouthrinses were shown to have significant antiplaque activity most frequently have used gingivitis as the clinically relevant endpoint. However, there is evidence to suggest that mouthrinses containing active agents effective against Streptococcus mutans, such as chlorhexidine, may also have a role in inhibiting dental caries. This clinical study was conducted to determine the effect of 2x-daily rinsing with an essential oil-containing antiseptic mouthrinse (Listerine Antiseptic) on levels of recoverable S. mutans and total streptococci in supragingival interproximal plaque and in saliva. Additionally, a follow-up in vitro study is reported which determined whether a differential susceptibility to the antiseptic mouthrinse exists among different strains of streptococci., Method: Following baseline saliva and plaque sampling for quantification of recoverable S. mutans and total streptococci, 29 qualifying subjects were randomly assigned either the essential oil mouthrinse or a sterile water control. They rinsed with 20 ml for 30s 2 x daily for 11 days and once on the 12th day, in addition to their usual oral hygiene procedures. On day 12, saliva and plaque samples were again collected and microbiological quantification performed. The procedures were repeated with the alternate rinse after a 1-week washout period., Results: The essential oil mouthrinse produced respective reductions of 69.9% and 75.4% in total recoverable streptococci and in S. mutans in plaque, and corresponding reductions of 50.8% and 39.2% in saliva. The in vitro study revealed that streptococci from the mutans group were more susceptible to the bactericidal activity of the essential oil mouthrinse than streptococci from the mitis group., Conclusions: As antimicrobial mouthrinses are most frequently recommended to patients whose mechanical oral hygiene procedures are not adequate for the control of supragingival plaque and gingivitis, this study provides an additional rationale for the inclusion of the essential-oil mouthrinse as an adjunct to daily oral hygiene procedures.

The adjunctive use of antimicrobial mouthrinses to help control supragingival plaque and gingivitis has been shown to contribute significantly to patients' daily oral hygiene regimens. This controlled clinical study used an observer-blind, randomized, cross-over design in a 4-day plaque regrowth model to determine the relative efficacies of an essential oil-containing mouthrinse (Listerine Antiseptic) and an amine fluoride/stannous fluoride-containing mouthrinse (Meridol) in inhibiting the development of supragingival plaque. A 0.1% chlorhexidine mouthrinse (Chlorhexamed-Fluid) was used as a positive control, and a 5% hydroalcohol solution was used as a negative control. Dosing for each of the test mouthrinses was based on the manufacturers' label directions. Because the volume and rinse time for each of the test mouthrinses were different, each test mouthrinse had its own negative control group. On day 1 of each test period, subjects received an oral soft and hard tissue examination and a dental prophylaxis to remove all plaque, calculus, and extrinsic stain. Starting the same day, subjects refrained from all mechanical oral hygiene procedures for the next 4 days and rinsed 2x daily under supervision with their randomly-assigned mouthrinse. On day 5, each subject received a plaque assessment as well as an oral examination to assess side effects. Each test period was separated by a 2-week washout period. 23 volunteers with a median age of 26 years completed the study. Compared to the respective placebos, the median percent plaque reductions at 5 days were 23.0%, 12.2%, and 38.2% for the essential oil, amine/stannous fluoride, and chlorhexidine rinses, respectively. The plaque reductions seen in the essential oil and chlorhexidine rinse groups were statistically significant (p < 0.001), while the plaque reduction in the amine/stannous fluoride rinse group was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Additionally, the essential oil rinse was significantly more effective (p < 0.001) than the amine/stannous fluoride rinse in inhibiting plaque accumulation in this clinical model.

The adjunctive use of antiplaque mouthrinses with normal oral hygiene procedures may produce a significant beneficial effect on gingival health. At present, numerous products are available with various claims for efficacy. Although for many of these products, well-controlled studies have been carried out comparing the products, against a negative control or placebo, very few studies have been carried out directly comparing the efficacy of one commercial product with another. In this observer-blind, 4-day plaque regrowth, crossover study, the efficacy of a commercial triclosan mouthrinse was compared to that of an essential oil mouthrinse and 2 placebo controls. Starting from zero plaque at the commencement of each trial period, 32 volunteers used only the allocated rinses as the method of oral hygiene over 4 days, and on the 5th day returned for measurement of plaque index and area. The essential oil rinse produced a plaque reduction of 52% for plaque area and 17% for plaque index compared to its placebo, whilst the triclosan rinse produced a 45% reduction for plaque area and 12% reduction for plaque index against its placebo. Analysis of variance and construction of 95% confidence intervals showed that both active rinses significantly reduced plaque compared to their respective placebo. In addition, the essential oil rinse significantly reduced plaque compared to the triclosan rinse for plaque index but not for plaque area. The findings of this study would suggest that of the 2 rinses, the essential oil rinse would be expected to be more effective at reducing plaque formation in the longer term.

The aim of this double-blind study was to enumerate the total number of living and dead bacteria on defined tooth areas during the application of antibacterial mouthrinses. After prophylaxis, 40 students refrained from all oral hygiene measures for 3 d, during which they rinsed with a phenolic compound (Listerine), an amine fluoride/stannous fluoride solution (Meridol), 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX) or a control solution (0.02% quinine-hydrochloride). The plaque index (P1I) was recorded at the start and the end of the investigation. Total bacterial counts (BC) and colony-forming units (CFU) of 1d-, 2d- and 3d-old dentogingival plaque were determined. The plating efficiency (PE) was calculated as a percentage of CFU/BC and the portion of vital microflora estimated by a vital fluorescence technique (VF). All groups started with a P1I approximating 0.1. On day 3, the P1I values were 1.21 in the control group and 0.51, 0.37 and 0.14 after Listerine, Meridol and CHX use, respectively. A tremendous variation existed between the numbers of viable bacteria found per mm2 on the enamel surface and day 3 (CHX: 0.2; Meridol: 300; Listerine; 6x10(4); control: 2x10(6)), while higher total numbers of bacteria were concomitantly present (CHX and Meridol: 1-2x10(4); Listerine: 2x10(5); control: 2x10(6)). Both vitality parameters PE and VF reached 92% in the control group at day 3, but only 7% after CHX use. With Meridol and Listerine, the corresponding PE values were 3% and 43%, respectively, while the VF values reached 48% and 54%. The PII, BC, CFU and PE values of the CHX and the Meridol groups differed significantly from those of the control group. In contrast, Listerine showed no difference as compared to the control rinse. Due to the strong antibacterial action of CHX and Meridol during their use, almost only dead or non-proliferating bacteria were found on the tooth surfaces. Thus, only a thin plaque could develop. As a clinical consequence, both substances showed retardation of plaque development as reflected by significantly reduced plaque indices.

The purpose of this controlled double-blind, parallel, randomized clinical study was to determine the effect of antiseptic mouthrinse on parameters important to dental implant maintenance. Plaque, peri-implant gingivitis, gingival bleeding, probing depth, and attachment level were assessed over a 3-month test period. Twenty healthy adult patients each of whom had at least two dental implants, a modified gingival index > 1.5, and a modified Quigley-Hein plaque index score > 1.7 were enrolled into the study. After a thorough oral prophylaxis, patients were randomly assigned to either the antiseptic mouthrinse or a 5% hydroalcohol placebo mouthrinse group and instructed to rinse twice daily for 30 seconds with 20 ml of their assigned mouthrinse as an adjunct to their usual oral hygiene procedures. The baseline examination included plaque index, gingival index, bleeding index, probing depth measurement, and attachment level measurements. The plaque and gingival indices were rescored at 1, 2, and 3 months. Probing depths, attachment levels, and bleeding index were determined again at 3 months only. At the end of 3 months, the antiseptic mouthrinse group had statistically significant reductions in plaque index, gingival index, and bleeding index compared to the placebo group. There were no significant differences between groups in probing depth or attachment level. The results of this clinical study indicate that twice daily use of an antiseptic mouthrinse may provide benefits in the maintenance of dental implants.

A new method, the Plaque Glycolysis and Regrowth Method (PGRM), is described for the evaluation of antimicrobial effects on plaque metabolism in vivo. The method relies on the experimental observation that in vivo sampled dental plaques, collected from different quadrants of the dentition, produce equivalent rates of metabolic activity and regrowth when similarly dispersed and normalized into incubation media. In applications of the technique to antimicrobial evaluations, overnight fasted dental plaque is collected from a non-treated quadrant of the dentition along the gingival margin. Topical formulations are used in vivo. Following this, dental plaques are collected from other dentition quadrants at extended times, allowing for the back diffusion, clearance and natural intraoral deactivation of antimicrobials within the oral cavity. In vivo treated and non-treated plaque samples are subsequently tested for metabolic and regrowth activity under controlled and standardized conditions in vitro following normalization for biomass. The technique thus combines the necessary biological factors important to the legitimate evaluation of antimicrobial effects in vivo, while benefiting from the improved precision and control provided by in vitro assessment of plaque activity. In this paper evidence is presented validating the PGRM method, and initial activity screens of commercial antimicrobial mouthrinses and toothpastes, including a new stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice, are described.

Today's dental professional must advise patients as to the antimicrobial mouthrinse appropriate for their periodontal condition. Considerations such as chemical nature, mechanism of action, efficacy, and safety of mouthrinses are important to the clinician. Taste and cost are equally important considerations to the patient. No ideal antimicrobial mouthrinse exists; yet, chlorhexidine gluconate (Peridex), Listerine, and two of its generic equivalents have the American Dental Association's Seal of Acceptance. An expanded role of antimicrobial mouthrinses that holds promise is that of preprocedural rinsing. This protocol can decrease the number of microorganisms aerosolized during numerous dental procedures.

The Seal of Acceptance of the American Dental Association's Council on Dental Therapeutics has been awarded to Listerine and chlorhexidine gluconate (Peridex). The mechanism of action of Listerine involves bacterial cell wall destruction, bacterial enzymatic inhibition, and extraction of bacterial lipopolysaccharides. Chlorhexidine has the property of substantivity, i.e. the ability to bind to hard and soft tissue with slow release. Antibacterial mouthrinses/dentifrices containing triclosan hold promise for the reduction of plaque and gingivitis but are not yet available in the United States. The quaternary ammonium compounds and sanguinarine compounds (Viadent) have some merit, but studies of their efficacy in plaque and gingivitis reduction are mixed. New products containing various fluorides and oxygenating agents may have potential for the future as antiplaque and antigingivitis agents.

This double-blind, controlled clinical study compared the effectiveness of 30- and 60-s listerine rinses in both inhibiting the development of, and reducing existing, supragingival plaque and gingivitis, using an experimental gingivitis model. 94 subjects completed this study. For each subject, a modified gingival index, modified Quigley-Hein plaque index and Eastman interdental bleeding index were recorded at baseline and at 2 weeks. Following the baseline examinations, subjects received half-mouth prophylaxes, and began 2 x daily supervised rinsing either with listerine for 30 or 60 s or with a control mouthrinse for 30 s as their sole oral hygiene measure. Statistical analysis (ANCOVA) showed that both the 30- and 60-s listerine rinses were significantly (p < 0.01) more effective than the control in inhibiting and reducing plaque, gingivitis and gingival bleeding. Although 60-s rinses with listerine were significantly more effective (p < 0.01) than 30-s rinses in controlling plaque, the 2 rinse durations were similarly effective in controlling interdental bleeding and gingivitis. This study confirms the recommendation of 2x daily rinsing with listerine for 30 s as an effective regimen for gingivitis control.

There is a continuing search for ingredients to enhance the chemical plaque inhibitory action of oral hygiene products. Sanguinarine, other natural extracts and triclosan have already been used in products. The aim of this study was to evaluate a number of triclosan and natural product rinses for effects on plaque regrowth. In particular, the influence of other rinse components were assessed, notably sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) and zinc. The study was a randomised, blind, 9-cell cross-over design to measure the effects of each rinse on 4-day plaque regrowth from a zero baseline. 15 volunteers rinsed 2x daily with each product and plaque was recorded by area and score. The 0.2% chlorhexidine rinse (positive control) was significantly more effective, and the saline rinse (negative control) significantly less effective, than other rinses. Sanguinarine alone was little different from saline and the addition of zinc made a modest improvement in activity. The 3 triclosan/SLS rinses were more effective than the sanguinarine rinses but similar to their minus triclosan control rinse. A natural product/SLS experimental rinse was second to chlorhexidine and, in many analyses, significantly better than all other rinses, but caused some oral erosions. The results indicate that the plaque inhibitory properties of basic ingredients such as SLS may be difficult to enhance or surpass. However, the possible range of recipes, particularly using natural ingredients, provides scope for research and development in the field of oral hygiene products.

The aim of the present study was to describe a 4-day no oral hygiene model to assess the pattern of de novo plaque formation and to use this model to appraise the potential of some mouthwash preparations to retard or inhibit plaque formation in the human dentition. 10 subjects were recruited for the trial. During a preparatory period, the participants were exposed to repeated professional plaque control and given oral hygiene instruction to eliminate signs of gingivitis. At the end of the preparatory period, each participant received a final professional tooth cleaning and was subsequently told to abstain from mechanical plaque control efforts for the next 4 days. They were asked to rinse twice daily for 60 s with 10 ml varying test solutions. On Day 4, the volunteers were exposed to a new clinical examination and the presence and amount of plaque were examined by the use of the plaque index system (P1I). The participants were subsequently given a professional tooth cleaning and asked to exercise proper self performed plaque control during the next 10 days. A new test period was then initiated. 6 different mouthwash preparations were tested in each subject namely, (1) placebo (a negative control rinse), (2) Veadent mouthrinse, (3) Listerine mouthrinse, (4) 0.06% triclosan + polyvinyl phosphonic acid (PVPA), (5) 0.06% triclosan + phenolic flavor and (6) 0.12% chlorhexidine digluconate (a positive control rinse). The results from the study revealed that the mean P1I values for individuals, groups of teeth and tooth surfaces provide an adequate but gross overall estimation of the potential of a given mouthrinse to retard/inhibit plaque build up. More detailed information on the effects of the test rinses could be obtained by data describing the % distribution of different P1I score categories; a high frequency of score 0 describes the potential of a mouthrinse to maintain tooth surfaces free from plaque while a low frequency of score 2/3 describes the ability of a treatment to retard/prevent gross plaque formation. The plaque pattern displays finally allowed assessment of the magnitude of plaque prevention, in comparison to the positive and negative controls, that could be achieved by a given compound in various parts and surfaces of the dentition. In this model, all test rinses (i) were significantly more effective than the placebo rinse in retarding de novo plaque build up and (ii) had a minor effects on plaque build up in the maxillary molars and at the approximal surfaces.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of a 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse and an essential oil mouthrinse on plaque accumulation and gingivitis in mentally handicapped adults over a one-year period. Twenty-seven institutionalized mentally handicapped adults participated. Gingival index (GI), plaque index (PI), and probing depths (PD) were recorded and an ultrasonic scaling was performed (Baseline 1). GI, PI, and PD were again recorded after 2 weeks (Baseline 2). Patients were then assigned to either the chlorhexidine or essential oil mouthrinse group. The patients rinsed twice daily under supervision with their assigned mouthrinse while maintaining their attempts at daily brushing. GI and PI were recorded at monthly intervals for 12 months, while the PD was recorded only at Baseline 1 and 2 and at 12 months. A paired t-test was used to compare differences between the parameters at Baseline 1 and Baseline 2. A 2-factor repeated measure ANOVA was performed on each parameter after the Baseline 2 evaluation. A statistically significant decrease in the probing depth occurred as a result of ultrasonic scaling; however, no significant changes in the PI or GI occurred. Both mouthrinses produced a significant improvement in the GI after one month. Despite the improvement, the GI was still indicative of disease. Over the 12 months no further significant improvement in the GI occurred. A statistically significant improvement in the PI occurred in the chlorhexidine group at month 1, but returned to Baseline 2 levels over the 12 months. No improvement in the PI occurred in the essential oil group. The probing depths remained the same over the 12 months.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The anti-plaque, anti-gingivitis and anti-microbial efficacies of a phenolic compound (Listerine) and 2 different amine/stannous fluoride mouthwashes (Meridol I, II) were compared when these solutions were used in addition to usual tooth cleaning. A placebo preparation was utilized as a negative control and a chlorhexidine solution as a positive control in this double-blind study. After professional tooth cleaning, 49 volunteers continued their habitual, self-performed and non-supervised oral hygiene for a period of 2 weeks, in order to have a more standard baseline. At day 0, they began to rinse twice daily with 1 of the 5 mouthwashes. After 3 weeks of rinsing, plaque indices remained the lowest in the chlorhexidine and the Meridol I groups, while subjects using Listerine or Meridol II demonstrated similar indices significantly lower than that of individuals rinsing with the placebo solution. Through this period, the gingival index scores were similar in the Meridol, Listerine and chlorhexidine groups. At day 21, the mean GI scores in the chlorhexidine group were significantly lower than the scores in the placebo group. The plaque vitality scores showed a bacterial effect in vivo of chlorhexidine and, to a lesser extent, of the Meridol solutions. No substantial evidence of an antibacterial effect in vivo was found for Listerine. This study has demonstrated that when mouthrinses are used to supplement habitual mechanical oral hygiene, chlorhexidine remains the most powerful solution. Furthermore, it was also shown that a combination of habitual self-performed and non-supervised oral hygiene with Meridol or Listerine is more beneficial for plaque control than the use of mechanical oral hygiene alone.