Effectiveness of interdental cleaning devices with active substances: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature on the efficacy of interdental cleaning devices (ICDs) used with active substances, as adjuncts to toothbrushing, in comparison with toothbrushing alone or with ICDs without active substances. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Searches for randomized clinical trials were performed in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane (CENTRAL), and Web of Science. Two independent researchers performed study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment; a third one resolved any disagreement. Meta-analysis was not feasible, and a narrative approach was used to synthesize the evidence. RESULTS: Seven studies were included. Dental floss with chlorhexidine was used in five studies, whereas interdental brushes with chlorhexidine and cetylpyridinium chloride were used in one study each. ICDs with active substances resulted in significantly higher antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacies than without ICDs (n = 3). ICDs with and without active substances demonstrated contrasting results. For this comparison, six studies were included for each outcome. Significantly higher antigingivitis efficacy of ICDs with active substances was noted in four studies, whereas significantly higher antiplaque efficacy of ICDs with active substances was reported in three studies. All comparisons demonstrated a very low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: There is no robust evidence for the additional clinical efficacy of ICDs with active substances regarding their antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacies. These devices may have additional clinical efficacy when compared with the absence of interproximal hygiene. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of ICDs helps maintain or achieve periodontal health. However, the adjunct use of active substances may not provide additional benefits.

Virucidal efficacy of chlorhexidine: a systematic review.

This study aimed to systematically review the literature about the virucidal efficacy of CHX in comparison to other substances used in the oral cavity. Electronic searches were performed in four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science). Only studies that presented the following characteristics were included: (1) verified virucidal efficacy of CHX against Herpes Simplex Type-1 (HSV-1), any Influenza, or any human coronavirus (HcoV); and (2) compared the virucidal efficacy of CHX with essential oils (Listerine®), quaternary ammonium compounds, povidone-iodine, hydrogen peroxide, negative control substance, and absence of therapy. Two researchers independently selected the studies, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias. A narrative data synthesis was used. Twenty-five studies were included, of which 21 were in vitro and four were randomized clinical trials (RCT). Studies assessed the virucidal efficacy of CHX against Herpes Simplex Type-1 (HSV-1) (10 studies), Influenza A (InfluA) (4 studies), human coronavirus (HCoV) (4 studies) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Related Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) (11 studies). Most studies demonstrated that CHX has a positive virucidal efficacy against HSV-1 and InfluA strains. However, lower efficacy was shown to InfluA strain in comparison to povidone-iodine. Lower to none virucidal efficacy of CHX is expected for HCoV and SARS-CoV-2 strains for in vitro studies. Three RCT demonstrated that CHX was able to significantly reduce the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 for a short period. CHX may present an interesting virucidal efficacy against HSV-1 and InfluA viruses. CHX also presents transient efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 when used as a mouthwash.

The effect of cetylpyridinium chloride mouthrinse as adjunct to toothbrushing compared to placebo on interproximal plaque and gingival inflammation-a systematic review with meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to systematically review the literature about the interproximal anti-plaque and anti-gingivitis efficacy of cetylpyrydinium chloride (CPC) mouthrinse compared to placebo solution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three databases (PUBMED, SCOPUS, and EMBASE) were searched for randomized clinical trials that compared the interproximal anti-plaque and anti-gingivitis effect of CPC and placebo mouthrinses as an adjunct to toothbrushing, after a minimum of 6 weeks. Individuals with any periodontal diagnosis were considered. Two meta-analyses were performed for the Turesky modification of the Quigley-Hein plaque index and the Löe and Silness gingival index. For both analyses, the mean differences (MD) between baseline and 6-weeks were calculated using a random-effect model. RESULTS: Eight studies were included. All included studies showed significant improvement in at least one of the parameters, favoring the CPC mouthrinse when compared to placebo. The meta-analysis demonstrated that groups that used CPC displayed a significantly greater reduction in the plaque index score (MD; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: - 0.70; - 0.83 to - 0.57) and in the gingival index (MD; 95%CI: - 0.38; - 0.47 to - 0.28) when compared to placebo. However, high heterogeneity was observed in both analyses (I2 = 89% and I2 = 98%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: When considering interproximal surfaces, CPC is efficacious both in plaque and gingival inflammatory parameters, demonstrating the potential to compensate for the limitations of interproximal plaque control. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: CPC may be a good alternative to compensate interproximal plaque removal, improving interproximal gingivitis.

Efficacy of ozonated water mouthwash on early plaque formation and gingival inflammation: a randomized controlled crossover clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of ozonated water in early plaque formation and gingival inflammation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind, crossover clinical trial with two experimental periods of 96 h each, with 10 washout days between them. The sample consisted of 42 dental students divided into Test Group, mouthwash of ozonated water, and Control Group, bidistilled water mouthwash. The participants were instructed not to perform oral hygiene and used the assigned mouthwash under supervision once a day. For the investigation of the initial subgingival biofilm formation, the Plaque Free Zone Index was used at 24, 48, 72, and 96 h. The volume of gingival crevicular fluid, a questionnaire for taste perception assessment, and analysis of the adverse effects were also carried out. RESULTS: The percentage of conversion scores 0 and 1 to 2 of PFZ Index, the main outcome, for all dental surfaces showed no statistical difference between Test and Control groups, with 19.07 and 19.79, respectively. Also, there was not a significant difference in the score frequencies at each time point. Evaluation of GCF demonstrated that both groups had an increase in volume during experimental periods and that there was no statistically significant difference among groups. Test group had worse evaluation of taste perception and more adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Ozonated water seems not to affect the formation of supra and subgingival biofilms, as well as gingival inflammation. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Mouthwash with ozonated water once a day do not affect supra and subgingival biofilm formation.

ANTI-PLAQUE AND ANTI-GINGIVITIS EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT BRISTLE STIFFNESS AND END-SHAPE TOOTHBRUSHES ON INTERPROXIMAL SURFACES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW WITH META-ANALYSIS.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of interproximal plaque scores and gingival inflammation reduction of different toothbrush bristle stiffness and end-shape. METHODS: Randomized clinical trials evaluating the effect of different toothbrushes on interproximal plaque/gingivitis reduction, with a minimum follow-up of 1 week. MEDLINE-PubMed, Scopus and Embase were searched. Soft tapered-tip bristle toothbrushes were compared to soft end-rounded, medium (any end-shape), or hard (any end-shape) bristle toothbrushes. Two meta-analyses were performed for plaque and gingivitis reduction. For plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI), a standard mean difference (SMD) and mean difference between baseline and 4 weeks were calculated, respectively. In all analyses, random effect models were used. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. All included studies demonstrated statistically significant improvement, in at least one parameter, in favor of the tapered-tip bristle toothbrush compared to the end-rounded bristle toothbrush. When analyzing toothbrush stiffness, medium and hard toothbrushes presented significantly higher improvement when compared to soft toothbrushes in all parameters. In the meta-analyses, groups that used soft tapered-tip bristle toothbrushes demonstrated significant greater reductions in PI (SMD -2.64; 95% CI: -4.26 - -1.01) and in GI (MD -0.14; 95% CI: -0.18 - -0.10) when compared to soft end-rounded bristle toothbrushes. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that, when considering interproximal surfaces, better results may be expected for tapered-tip bristle toothbrushes when compared to end-rounded bristles toothbrushes. Additionally, better results may be expected in medium or hard toothbrushes, regardless of the bristle end-shape, in non-interproximal cleaners.

Antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of cetylpyridinium chloride with zinc lactate compared with essential oil mouthrinses: Randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The authors of this study aimed to evaluate the clinical antiplaque and antigingivitis effects of 3 oral hygiene regimens: toothbrushing with standard fluoride toothpaste and manual toothbrush and using a mouthrinse containing cetylpyridinium chloride, zinc lactate, and fluoride (CPC + Zn + F) in an alcohol-free base; toothbrushing with standard fluoride toothpaste and manual toothbrush and using a mouthrinse containing essential oils (EO) in an alcohol-free base; and toothbrushing with manual toothbrush and standard fluoride toothpaste and manual toothbrush (control). METHODS: The participants (N = 120) were randomly assigned to study groups and followed the assigned regimens twice daily for 6 weeks. The participants were examined by a calibrated examiner for the Quigley-Hein plaque index (Turesky modification) and Löe-Silness gingival index at baseline, week 4, and week 6. Statistical analyses were performed separately for plaque and gingival indexes by means of analysis of variance, paired t test, and analysis of covariance (α = 0.05). RESULTS: At week 4, the CPC + Zn + F group presented additional reductions in dental plaque compared with EO and control groups of (21.4% [P < .001] and 31.4% [P < .001], respectively). After 6 weeks, these values were 26.7% (P < .001) and 44.8% (P < .001), respectively. For Löe-Silness gingival index, additional reduction in the CPC + Zn + F group compared with EO were 10.6% (P < .001) and 13.7% (P < .001) at 4 and 6 weeks, respectively. Compared with control, these reductions were 13.6% (P < .001) and 17.8% (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The regimen including a mouthrinse containing CPC + Zn + F presented higher antiplaque and antigingivitis effects than EO and control regimens. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: A mouthrinse containing CPC + Zn + F is an effective protocol for the control of dental plaque and gingivitis.

A Systematic Review of the Effect of Oral Rinsing with H2O2 on Clinical and Microbiological Parameters Related to Plaque, Gingivitis, and Microbes.

BACKGROUND: Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) has been used for more than a century clinically to control plaque and gingival inflammation, with unclear supporting evidence. AIM: The aim of the present systematic review of the literature is to assess the effect of mouth rinses with H2O2 on dental plaque, gingival inflammation, and oral microorganisms. METHODS: Five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched with the following focused question: what is the effect of hydrogen peroxide, in comparison to chlorhexidine or to a placebo solution, in oral microbiota control, dental plaque, and gingival inflammatory outcomes? Two independent examiners retrieved the articles and evaluated the evidence. RESULTS: The majority of included studies were performed with 1.5% H2O2. Results related to plaque accumulation generally demonstrate a slightly better effect of H2O2 as compared to placebo mouth rinses, however with a lower performance as compared to chlorhexidine. In terms of gingival inflammation, H2O2 performs better than placebo and more clearly demonstrates an anti-inflammation effect. No studies evaluated the effect of H2O2 against viruses or fungi. In terms of bacteria, H2O2 demonstrates an antibacterial effect. CONCLUSION: Rinsing with H2O2 has the potential to affect plaque, gingivitis, and oral bacteria, as compared to placebo. However, the antibacterial results are not comparable to the performance of chlorhexidine.

Comparison Between Hand and Sonic/ Ultrasonic Instruments for Periodontal Treatment: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

AIMS: To systemically review the literature on the effect of hand and sonic/ultrasonic instruments used for the non-surgical treatment of periodontitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five databases were searched for randomized clinical trials that compared the results of periodontal treatment using hand and sonic/ultrasonic for nonsurgical periodontal treatment. Four meta-analyses were performed, using the calculated mean differences (MD) between baseline and 3-months or 6-months after periodontal treatment for clinical attachment level (CAL), and probing pocket depth (PPD). RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included. All included studies showed significant improvement, in at least one periodontal parameter, in both tested periodontal therapies. The sonic/ultrasonic instruments spend significantly less time in comparison to manual instrumentation. At both 3- and 6-months after periodontal therapy, no statistically significant differences were detected for CAL gain between therapies (MD; 95%CI: 0.05; -0.21-0.30 and -0.23; -0.59-0.12). Similarly, no statistically significant differences were detected for PPD reduction between therapies at 3-months of follow-up (MD; 95%CI: -0.03; -0.34-0.28). After 6-months, the PPD reduction was 0.21 (95%CI: -0.43-0.00, p=0.05). CONCLUSION: Similar results may be expected for the periodontal treatment performed with hand and sonic/ultrasonic instruments. However, further studies with lower risk of bias are warranted.

Dental Care and the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Precautionary Principle and the Best Available Evidence

Abstract The precautionary principle is part of evidence-based healthcare and is used both preventively and therapeutically when there is no available evidence about how to manage problems/diseases/conditions that are especially life-threatening. However, since it is not always based in the most qualified evidence, it is frequently questioned. The emergence of a highly contagious disease, with increased levels of morbimortality, an acute respiratory syndrome, the so called Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), led health professionals to look for the best alternatives to save lives. In this sense, the precautionary principle was evocated. The aim of this paper is to make a reflection about the precautionary principle, the dental profession and COVID-19. It is important to have in mind that in such a disease, guidelines, protocols and approaches can change very fast, since a continuous evaluation of all policies is mandatory. During the pandemic, elective procedures may be restricted, but international organizations removed the recommendation to postpone elective procedures. Clinicians are advised to be updated about their local current policies. On the other hand, there are cases in which in-office dental care is unavoidable, such as individuals with pain, spontaneous bleeding and dental trauma. Biosafety is upmost importance when seeking patients during pandemic. In this sense, it was concluded that precautionary principle should be, therefore, used. However, caution needs to be taken and continuous surveillance necessary.