Clinical efficacy of listerine in inhibiting and reducing plaque and experimental gingivitis

Mankodi, S; Ross, Norton M.; Mostler, K

doi:10.1111/j.1600-051x.1987.tb01534.x

Cited by 29 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present study confirms the antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of an EO mouthrinse which has been demonstrated in short-term, 7,8,9 as well as in longer-term studies 6,10,11,12,13 following the ADA guidelines for clinical trials. These studies showed up to 56% greater plaque reduction and up to 34% greater gingivitis reduction than control in subjects with mild-to-moderate plaque and gingivitis.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Clinical trials utilizing experimental gingivitis models have been frequently used as a short-term model to evaluate the antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of mouthrinses containing antimicrobial agents. These trials have tested a fixed combination of essential oils, 8,9 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate, 25,26 cetylpyridinium chloride, 27 0.1% hexetidine, 28 and other noncommercial antimicrobial agents. 29 Therefore, there is enough evidence to support that experimental gingivitis study designs, like long-term models, have been accepted as a valid model to determine and compare efficacy of antiseptic mouthrinses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An essential oil-containing mouthrinse (EO) has demonstrated significant antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy in short-term 7,8,9 and long-term clinical studies 6,10,11,12,13 designed within the guidelines required by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs for evaluating the clinical efficacy of chemotherapeutic mouthrinses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of three antiseptic mouthrinses: a two week randomized clinical trial

Amini¹,

Araujo

et al. 2009

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this randomized, examiner blind, parallel group, controlled clinical trial was to compare the antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of an essential oil-containing mouthrinse (EO) to two mouthrinses containing 0.05% Cetylpyridinium Chloride (CPC), one with alcohol and one alcohol-free, using a two-week experimental gingivitis validated-model with a 5% hydroalcohol rinse serving as the negative control. One hundred and fifty-nine subjects, 56 males and 103 females; ranging in age from 18 to 58 years in good general health were assigned to one of the four treatment groups: EO (n = 40), 0.05% CPC with alcohol (CPC a , n = 39), 0.05% CPC alcohol-free (CPC na , n = 40), and 5% hydroalcohol negative control (n = 40). The Mean Turesky Modification of the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (PI) and the Mean Modified Gingival Index (MGI) were the primary efficacy endpoints and were evaluated at baseline and at two weeks. Following baseline examinations, subjects received a complete dental prophylaxis and began supervised rinsing with their assigned mouthrinse twice daily for two weeks, as their sole oral hygiene measure; 151 subjects completed the trial. Two weeks after baseline the EO adjusted mean PI and MGI scores were significantly lower than those of both CPC rinses and negative control (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the EO mouthrinse demonstrated significantly greater antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy than both CPC-containing mouthrinses and the negative control.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of three antiseptic mouthrinses: a two week randomized clinical trial

Amini¹,

Araujo

et al. 2009

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…sential oils [12][13][14] and to demonstrate superiority to 0.05% CPC rinses. 15 This experimental gingivitis model is useful as a short-term model to determine efficacy of mouthrinse formulations and has been found to be consistent with six-month clinical trials results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative efficacy of two daily use mouthrinses: randomized clinical trial using an experimental gingivitis model

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two antimicrobial agents, a fixed combination of essential oils (EOs) and 0.07% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) are found in commercially available mouthrinses, Listerine  Antiseptic and Crest  Pro Health  , respectively. Both mouthrinses have been shown to control dental plaque and gingivitis in short and longer term studies. The aim of this study was to determine the comparative effectiveness of these two mouthrinses using a 2-week experimental gingivitis model. Qualified subjects were randomly assigned to one of three mouthrinse groups: a fixed combination of EOs, 0.07% CPC, or negative control (C) rinse. Following baseline clinical assessments and a dental prophylaxis, subjects began a two-week period in which they rinsed twice daily with their assigned rinse and abstained from any mechanical oral hygiene procedures or other oral care products. Subjects were reassessed at the end of the two-week period. One hundred and forty-seven subjects were randomized and 142 completed this study. After two weeks use, the EOs rinse was superior (p ≤ 0.011) to the CPC rinse in inhibiting the development of gingivitis, plaque, and bleeding, with 9.4% and 6.6% reductions compared to CPC for gingivitis and plaque, respectively. Both rinses were superior to the negative control rinse (p < 0.001). This study demonstrates that the essential oil-containing mouthrinse has superior antiplaque/antigingivitis effectiveness compared to the 0.07% CPC-containing mouthrinse without mechanical oral hygiene influence.

show abstract

“…This data confirmed that rinsing regularly with an EOcontaining mouthrinse twice a day can reduce the level of blood-borne bacteria caused by a standardized challenge such as that of chewing an apple. It seems reasonable to assume that maintaining good oral hygiene practices, including tooth brushing, flossing and using an effective antimicrobial mouthrinse agent regularly, contributes to preventing periodontal disease, [7][8][9][10][11][12] which, in turn, leads to a lower risk of developing bacteremia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the anti-bacteremic efficacy of an essential oil rinse in a Brazilian population: a cross-over study

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This cross-over study was conducted to assess the germ-killing efficacy of an essential oil mouthrinse (EOM) by determining the blood levels of microorganisms associated with induced bacteremia and investigating the prevalence of this event in Brazilians with mild-to-moderate gingivitis. Thirty four (31.19%) subjects positive for bacteremia induced by chewing a ration of apple were enrolled out of 109 screened subjects (50 males and 59 females). A difference of at least 10 colony forming units between the pre-and post-insult blood samples was defined as a positive result. For the following two weeks patients underwent a toothbrush plus fluoride dentifrice normalization period, and were then scheduled for the Phase I protocol as follows. At baseline I, subjects were instructed to chew a new apple ration, had new blood samples taken before and after this oral stimulus, and were randomly assigned to an experimental essential oil (n = 17) or placebo (P) mouthrinse (n = 17) treatment for 2 weeks. These procedures were repeated at the end of Phase I and then followed by a two-week wash-out period (tooth brushing with fluoride dentifrice). Bacteremia was again induced at baseline and at the end of Phase II, when subjects were crossed-over to the other EOM or placebo groups. Bacterial count differences between baseline and 2-week post-treatment (EOM versus P) in the blood samples collected were assessed by analysis of covariance. Mean aerobic counts decreased by 45.8%, whereas mean anaerobic counts decreased by 63.3% after EOM treatment. After the P treatment, aerobic bacteria increased by 28.4% and anaerobic bacteria decreased by 18.5%. This study validated this novel methodology and showed that the germ-killing action of EOM significantly reduced bacteremia.

show abstract

Clinical efficacy of listerine in inhibiting and reducing plaque and experimental gingivitis

Cited by 29 publications

References 10 publications

Comparative antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of three antiseptic mouthrinses: a two week randomized clinical trial

Comparative antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of three antiseptic mouthrinses: a two week randomized clinical trial

Comparative efficacy of two daily use mouthrinses: randomized clinical trial using an experimental gingivitis model

Validation of the anti-bacteremic efficacy of an essential oil rinse in a Brazilian population: a cross-over study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About