Plaque inhibition of two commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses

Abstract

Within the limitations of the present study design, it can be concluded that rinsing with a 0.12% CHX mouthrinse on a non-alcohol base with 0.05% Cpc (Perio-Aid) is not significantly different from rinsing with a 0.2% CHX mouthrinse on an alcohol base (Corsodyl). It appears that the subjects appreciated the taste of the non-alcohol CHX solution better but the after-taste of the rinse remained longer in the mouth.

Chlorhexidine with or without alcohol against biofilm formation: efficacy, adverse events and taste preference

“…Again, CHXAL received a significantly worse assessment than either the CHX formulation or PLA. This finding is corroborated by other studies that also reported better palatability of alcohol-free formulations 13,14 . This was the first study in the literature to use a hedonic scale to assess taste preference for chlorhexidine solutions.…”

“…The use of chlorhexidine is associated with adverse events such as staining of teeth, restorations, prosthetic appliances and even the tongue, as well as taste disturbances, supragingival calculus formation, and, possibly, reversible swelling of the lips or parotid glands, desquamation of the oral mucosa, urticaria, dyspnea, and anaphylactic shock 11,12 . Regarding taste, two studies showed that alcohol-free chlorhexidine solutions with cetylpyridinium chloride were more palatable than alcohol-containing chlorhexidine solutions 13,14 , using a visual analogue scale. However, there is no information in the literature about taste preference for alcohol-free chlorhexidine solutions, as assessed by a specific scale designed to measure hedonic responses.…”

Anti-plaque effect of a synergistic combination of green tea and Salvadora persica L. against primary colonizers of dental plaque

“…As the anti-plaque effects of these extracts were planned to be assessed in vitro with expectation of introducing natural agent used in chemical plaque control in vivo, thus it was principal to introduce safe plant extracts with minimal side effects. Although alcoholic extract can give better anti-microbial effect (Das, Tiwari, & Shrivastava, 2010), but it was reported to have restrictions when used intraorally in certain patients like pregnant and nursing women, alcoholics, diabetic, children and patients with xerostomia (Mankodi et al, 2005;Van Strydonck, Timmerman, Van Der Velden, & Van Der Weijden, 2005;Witt et al, 2005), in addition to unwanted effects such as composite filling surface softening (Penugonda, Settembrini, Scherer, Hittelman, & Strassler, 1994). For that reason, distilled water was decided to be used since it is the safe and inexpensive universal to extract plant constituents with antimicrobial activity (Das et al, 2010).…”

Antibacterial and synergistic effects of the <i>n</i>-BuOH fraction of <i>Sophora flavescens</i> root against oral bacteria

“…Therefore, natural products with antiplaque properties, antimicrobial activity, and inhibitory effects against biofilm formation by oral pathogens would be desirable Antibiotics such as ampicillin, chlorhexidine, erythromycin, penicillin, tetracycline, and vancomycin have been used to prevent and treat dental caries (12,16,30). Recently, some plant extracts have been shown to have superior efficacy against antibiotic-resistant bacteria (31).…”

“…A variety of antimicrobial agents, including fluorides, phenol derivatives, ampicillin, erythromycin, penicillin, tetracycline, and vancomycin have been used widely in dentistry for inhibiting the proliferation of bacteria (9)(10)(11). However, excessive use of these agents can cause side effects such as susceptibility to microorganisms, vomiting, diarrhea and tooth staining, as well as disturbance of the oral and intestinal environment (10,(12)(13). Therefore there is a need to search for new natural antimicrobial agents that are safe and act specifically against human oral pathogens.…”