A randomized, controlled clinical trial on the clinical, microbiological, and staining effects of a novel 0.05% chlorhexidine/herbal extract and a 0.1% chlorhexidine mouthrinse adjunct to periodontal surgery

BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine (CHX) rinsing after periodontal surgery is common. We assessed the clinical and microbiological effects of two CHX concentrations following periodontal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a randomized, controlled clinical trial, 45 subjects were assigned to 4 weeks rinsing with a 0.05 CHX/herbal extract combination (test) or a 0.1% CHX solution. Clinical and staining effects were studied. Subgingival bacteria were assessed using the DNA-DNA checkerboard. Statistics included parametric and non-parametric tests (p<0001 to declare significance at 80% power). RESULTS: At weeks 4 and 12, more staining was found in the control group (p<0.05 and p<0.001, respectively). A higher risk for staining was found in the control group (crude OR: 2.3:1, 95% CI: 1.3 to 4.4, p<0.01). The absolute staining reduction in the test group was 21.1% (9 5% CI: 9.4-32.8%). Probing pocket depth (PPD) decreases were significant (p<0.001) in both groups and similar (p=0.92). No rinse group differences in changes of bacterial counts for any species were found between baseline and week 12. CONCLUSIONS: The test CHX rinse resulted in less tooth staining. At the study endpoint, similar and high counts of periodontal pathogens were found.

Erosive tooth wear: diagnosis, risk factors and prevention

PURPOSE: To provide an overview on diagnosis, risk factors and prevention of erosive tooth wear, which is becoming an increasingly important factor when considering the long- term health of the dentition. RESULTS: Awareness of dental erosion by the public is still not widespread due to the cryptic nature of this slowly progressing condition. Smooth silky-glazed appearance with the absence of perikymata and intact enamel along the gingival margin, with cupping and grooving on occlusal surfaces are some typical signs of enamel erosion. In later stages, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between the influences of erosion, attrition or abrasion during a clinical examination. Biological, behavioral and chemical factors all come into play, which over time, may either wear away the tooth surface, or potentially protect it. In order to assess the risk factors, patient should record their dietary intake for a distinct period of time. Based on these analyses, an individually tailored preventive program may be suggested to patients. It may comprise dietary advice, optimization of fluoride regimes, stimulation of salivary flow rate, use of buffering medicaments and particular motivation for non-destructive tooth brushing habits. The frequent use of fluoride gel and fluoride mouthrinse in addition to fluoride toothpaste offers the opportunity to minimize abrasion of tooth substance.

Comparative efficacy of two mouthrinses in a 6-month study

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the effects of a commercial CPC (cetylpyridinium chloride) mouthrinse containing 0.07% CPC (Crest® ProHealth Rinse) versus those provided by a commercial essential flavor oil mouthrinse (Listerine® Antiseptic) on dental plaque accumulation and prevention of gingivitis in an unsupervised 6 month clinical study. Methods: This was a double blind, 6-month, parallel group, positive controlled study involving 128 subjects who were balanced and randomly assigned to either positive control (essential oil) or experimental (CPC) mouthrinse treatment groups. The CPC mouthrinse passed proposed performance assays by the FDA for an OTC CPC mouthrinse. At baseline, subjects received a dental prophylaxis and began unsupervised rinsing twice daily with 20 ml. of their assigned mouthrinse for 30 seconds after brushing their teeth for 1 min. Subjects were assessed for gingivitis and gingival bleeding by the Gingival Index (GI) of Loe and Silness and plaque by the Silness and Loe Plaque Index (PI) at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of product use. Oral soft tissue health was also assessed. Microbiological samples were also taken for community profiling by the DNA-DNA checkerboard method. Results: Results show that after 3 and 6 months use there was no significant difference (p = 0.05) between the CPC and essential oil mouthrinse treatment groups for overall gingivitis status, gingival bleeding, and plaque. At 6 months the covariant (baseline) –adjusted mean GI and bleeding sites numbers for the CPC and essential oil mouthrinses were 0.52 and 0.53 and 5.5 and 6.3, respectively. Both mouth rinses were well tolerated by the subjects. Microbiological community profiles were similar for the 2 treatment group. Conclusion: This study shows that the 0.07% CPC mouthrinse can provide similar plaque and gingivitis benefits to those provided by an essential oil mouthrinse over a 6 month period.