Efficacy of a 0.03% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride mouth rinse in reducing inflammation around the teeth and implants: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of a 0.03% chlorhexidine (CHX) and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouth rinse, as an adjunct to professional plaque removal (PPR) and mechanical hygiene, in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (PiM) and gingivitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients displaying PiM in, at least, one implant were included in this randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. Subjects received PPR (at baseline and 6-month visits) and were instructed to rinse, twice daily, during 1 year with the tested mouth rinse or a placebo. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes were recorded at baseline and 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were included in the study and 46 attended the final visit. In the teeth and implants with inflammation, a higher reduction in BOP was observed in the test group. Statistically significant differences between groups were only observed in the lingual sites of the teeth with gingivitis (mean difference = 11.96%; 95% confidence interval [1.09; 22.83]; p = 0.03). Overall, compliance and satisfaction were good, even though staining were higher for the test group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of mechanical debridement with a 0.03% CHX and 0.05% CPC mouth rinse may have adjunctive benefits in the management of gingivitis, and it is associated with a higher degree of staining. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The control of gingivitis can be improved, after professional mechanical debridement, with toothbrushing and the supplementary use of a 0.03% CHX and 0.05% CPC mouth rinse at home. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03533166.

Clinical effects of the adjunctive use of a 0.03% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride mouth rinse in the management of peri-implant diseases: A randomized clinical trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of a 0.03% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride mouth rinse, as an adjunct to professionally and patient-administered mechanical plaque removal, in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (PiM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients displaying PiM in, at least, one implant were included in this randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. Subjects received professional prophylaxis (baseline and 6 months) and were instructed to regular oral hygiene practices and to rinse, twice daily, with the test or placebo mouth rinses, during one year. Clinical, radiographic and microbiological outcomes were evaluated at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Disease resolution was defined as absence of bleeding on probing (BOP). Data were analysed by repeated measures ANOVA, Student's t and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were included and 46 attended the final visit (22 in control and 24 in test group). In the test group, there was a 24.49% greater reduction in BOP at the buccal sites (95% confidence interval [3.65-45.34%]; p = 0.002) than in controls. About 58.3% of test implants and 50% controls showed healthy peri-implant tissues at final visit (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the test mouth rinse demonstrated some adjunctive benefits in the treatment of PiM. Complete disease resolution could not be achieved in every case.