Inhibitory effects of antiseptic mouthrinses on Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sanguinis and Lactobacillus acidophilus

Abstract

Background: Oral antiseptics are valuable in controlling oral infections caused by cariogenic bacteria. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of mouthrinses and pure antiseptic compounds on Streptococcus mutans and nonmutans bacteria (Streptococcus sanguinis and Lactobacillus acidophilus). Methods: The agar diffusion assay was employed to determine bacterial growth inhibition. Results: Commercial mouthrinses containing chlorhexidine gluconate (0.2%), cetylpyridinium chloride (0.05%) and sodium fluoride (0.05%) produced statistically similar growth inhibition of S. mutans, S. sanguinis and L. acidophilus (with zones of inhibition ranging from 7.56 AE 0.52 mm to 7.39 AE 0.53 mm, 17.44 AE 0.94 mm to 18.31 AE 0.62 mm and 8.61 AE 1.43 to 8.67 AE 1.43 mm respectively, p > 0.05). The chlorhexidine mouthwash produced the greatest mean growth inhibition of S. sanguinis and S. mutans compared to all other mouthrinses tested (p < 0.01). The minimum concentrations at which inhibition against S. mutans could be detected were chlorhexidine gluconate at 0.005% (wt/vol), cetylpyridinium chloride 0.01% (wt/ vol), povidone iodine 10% (wt/vol) and sodium hypochlorite 0.5% (vol/vol). Conclusions: Chlorhexidine (0.01%), cetylpyridinium chloride (0.01%), povidone iodine (10%) and sodium hypochlorite (0.5%) are effective at inhibiting the growth of S. mutans, S. sanguinis and L. acidophilus.

Mouthwash Effects on LGG-Integrated Experimental Oral Biofilms

“…Yousefimanesh et al evaluated the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) with the tube dilution method and found, in agreement with our own findings, that Lactobacillus casei was more susceptible to CHX mouthwashes than was S. mutans [40]. Conversely, some groups have reported that L. acidophilus in an agar diffusion assay [25], L. rhamnosus in in vitro biofilms [41][42][43], and salivary L. rhamnosus and lactobacilli in vivo [23,44] were less susceptible to CHX than were S. mutans and S. sanguinis. Such a difference between study results may be the result of such variables as strain type, (e.g., freshly isolated Lactobacillus strains from lesions of nursing caries are generally more tolerant than the type collection strains) [45,46]; as differences in species [46]; as differing concentrations of active components [46]; and as differences in component combinations [47].…”

“…Thus, they may easily be eliminated from the mouth when oral hygiene practices are regularly performed. Previous studies have shown that CHX had no detectable effect on salivary L. rhamnosus [23], and Lactobacillus strains were less susceptible to CHX and sodium fluoride (NaF) than was Streptococcus mutans [24][25][26]. A probiotic with multiple health benefits, LGG was able to integrate into experimental biofilms [27].…”

Biofilm viability checker: An open-source tool for automated biofilm viability analysis from confocal microscopy images

“…3b). It is expected that a larger study would support the effectiveness of the mouthwash treatment at reducing the percentage of live bacteria in S. sanguinis biofilms, as evidenced by other literature 45,46 . This was not the objective of the present study, rather the aim was to demonstrate the application of the automated image analysis.…”

Influence of preprocedural antiseptic mouthrinses against COVID-19 on enamel/dentin bond strength of a universal adhesive

“…In the literature there are numerous studies that have been undertaken to examine the effect of mouthrinses mostly contains fluoride and chlorhexidine on bond strength of resin composites [39][40][41]. Studies evaluating the effect of mouthrinses including H 2 O 2 or PVP-I are very few and mostly focused on tooth color change, surface properties [42,43], oral hygiene and antimicrobial efficiency [44][45][46]. We could only find one research with respect to PVP-I influence on bonding performance of dental adhesives.…”