-
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Dec 2023Artificial intelligence (AI) models have been developed for periodontal applications, including diagnosing gingivitis and periodontal disease, but their accuracy and... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Artificial intelligence (AI) models have been developed for periodontal applications, including diagnosing gingivitis and periodontal disease, but their accuracy and maturity of the technology remain unclear.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the performance of the AI models for detecting dental plaque and diagnosing gingivitis and periodontal disease.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A review was performed in 4 databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, World of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus. A manual search was also conducted. Studies were classified into 4 groups: detecting dental plaque, diagnosis of gingivitis, diagnosis of periodontal disease from intraoral images, and diagnosis of alveolar bone loss from periapical, bitewing, and panoramic radiographs. Two investigators evaluated the studies independently by applying the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal. A third examiner was consulted to resolve any lack of consensus.
RESULTS
Twenty-four articles were included: 2 studies developed AI models for detecting plaque, resulting in accuracy ranging from 73.6% to 99%; 7 studies assessed the ability to diagnose gingivitis from intraoral photographs reporting an accuracy between 74% and 78.20%; 1 study used fluorescent intraoral images to diagnose gingivitis reporting 67.7% to 73.72% accuracy; 3 studies assessed the ability to diagnose periodontal disease from intraoral photographs with an accuracy between 47% and 81%, and 11 studies evaluated the performance of AI models for detecting alveolar bone loss from radiographic images reporting an accuracy between 73.4% and 99%.
CONCLUSIONS
AI models for periodontology applications are still in development but might provide a powerful diagnostic tool.
Topics: Humans; Dental Plaque; Alveolar Bone Loss; Artificial Intelligence; Periodontal Diseases; Gingivitis
PubMed: 35300850
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.01.026 -
Oral Health & Preventive Dentistry Oct 2020Currently, there is no consensus on recommendations for manual toothbrushing techniques between dentists, oral health therapists and dental companies. The aim of this...
PURPOSE
Currently, there is no consensus on recommendations for manual toothbrushing techniques between dentists, oral health therapists and dental companies. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and assess the quality of evidence of the effectiveness of manual toothbrushing techniques in the existing literature.
METHODS
A broad search was conducted on the electronic databases Medline via Ovid, PubMed and EBSCO Dentistry & Oral Sciences. Included studies examined manual toothbrushing technique efficiency. Articles were assessed utilising the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. These included five randomised controlled trials (RCT), seven experimental non-randomised control studies and one in vitro study.
RESULTS
Of the 3190 articles identified, 40 were relevant to manual toothbrushing and 13 were included in the final review. Studies indicating statistically significantly superior plaque removal for a given technique were Bass (one), modified Bass (one), Charter's (two), Fones (two), scrub (two), roll (one), modified Stillman (one), toothpick method (one). Four studies exhibited no statistically significant difference in effectiveness of plaque removal. Unfortunately, considerable variation was found between studies, making a definitive conclusion impossible in terms of an ideal manual toothbrushing technique that would promote plaque removal and reduce gingivitis.
CONCLUSION
There is still insufficient evidence for suggesting that one toothbrushing method is more effective than another in plaque removal and reduction of gingivitis. Excessive variability in many aspects of the design and methodology of the selected studies hinder conclusions on an ideal manual toothbrushing technique. Experimental randomised controlled trials that follow the CONSORT guidelines are required to provide adequate-quality evidence and make any definitive conclusions on the relative effectiveness of manual toothbrushing techniques.
Topics: Dental Care; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Humans; Oral Health; Toothbrushing
PubMed: 33028052
DOI: 10.3290/j.ohpd.a45354 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2018Periodontitis is a bacterially-induced, chronic inflammatory disease that destroys the connective tissues and bone that support teeth. Active periodontal treatment aims... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Periodontitis is a bacterially-induced, chronic inflammatory disease that destroys the connective tissues and bone that support teeth. Active periodontal treatment aims to reduce the inflammatory response, primarily through eradication of bacterial deposits. Following completion of treatment and arrest of inflammation, supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) is employed to reduce the probability of re-infection and progression of the disease; to maintain teeth without pain, excessive mobility or persistent infection in the long term, and to prevent related oral diseases.According to the American Academy of Periodontology, SPT should include all components of a typical dental recall examination, and importantly should also include periodontal re-evaluation and risk assessment, supragingival and subgingival removal of bacterial plaque and calculus, and re-treatment of any sites showing recurrent or persistent disease. While the first four points might be expected to form part of the routine examination appointment for periodontally healthy patients, the inclusion of thorough periodontal evaluation, risk assessment and subsequent treatment - normally including mechanical debridement of any plaque or calculus deposits - differentiates SPT from routine care.Success of SPT has been reported in a number of long-term, retrospective studies. This review aimed to assess the evidence available from randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) in the maintenance of the dentition of adults treated for periodontitis.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 8 May 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 8 May 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 8 May 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating SPT versus monitoring only or alternative approaches to mechanical debridement; SPT alone versus SPT with adjunctive interventions; different approaches to or providers of SPT; and different time intervals for SPT delivery.We excluded split-mouth studies where we considered there could be a risk of contamination.Participants must have completed active periodontal therapy at least six months prior to randomisation and be enrolled in an SPT programme. Trials must have had a minimum follow-up period of 12 months.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened search results to identify studies for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted study data. When possible, we calculated mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous variables. Two review authors assessed the quality of evidence for each comparison and outcome using GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four trials involving 307 participants aged 31 to 85 years, who had been previously treated for moderate to severe chronic periodontitis. Three studies compared adjuncts to mechanical debridement in SPT versus debridement only. The adjuncts were local antibiotics in two studies (one at high risk of bias and one at low risk) and photodynamic therapy in one study (at unclear risk of bias). One study at high risk of bias compared provision of SPT by a specialist versus general practitioner. We did not identify any RCTs evaluating the effects of SPT versus monitoring only, or of providing SPT at different time intervals, or that compared the effects of mechanical debridement using different approaches or technologies.No included trials measured our primary outcome 'tooth loss'; however, studies evaluated signs of inflammation and potential periodontal disease progression, including bleeding on probing (BoP), clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD).There was no evidence of a difference between SPT delivered by a specialist versus a general practitioner for BoP or PPD at 12 months (very low-quality evidence). This study did not measure CAL or adverse events.Due to heterogeneous outcome reporting, it was not possible to combine data from the two studies comparing mechanical debridement with or without the use of adjunctive local antibiotics. Both studies found no evidence of a difference between groups at 12 months (low to very low-quality evidence). There were no adverse events in either study.The use of adjunctive photodynamic therapy did not demonstrate evidence of benefit compared to mechanical debridement only (very low-quality evidence). Adverse events were not measured.The quality of the evidence is low to very low for these comparisons. Future research is likely to change the findings, therefore the results should be interpreted with caution.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, there is insufficient evidence to determine the superiority of different protocols or adjunctive strategies to improve tooth maintenance during SPT. No trials evaluated SPT versus monitoring only. The evidence available for the comparisons evaluated is of low to very low quality, and hampered by dissimilarities in outcome reporting. More trials using uniform definitions and outcomes are required to address the objectives of this review.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chronic Periodontitis; Dental Plaque; Humans; Middle Aged; Periodontal Debridement; Periodontics; Photochemotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth Loss
PubMed: 29291254
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009376.pub2 -
Oral Health & Preventive Dentistry Jun 2022To summarise the available data on the effects of chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwash in treating gingivitis during treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To summarise the available data on the effects of chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwash in treating gingivitis during treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Multiple electronic databases were searched up to December 7th, 2021. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion. The quality of the included RCTs was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2.0). After data extraction and risk of bias assessment, differences were recorded in several oral hygiene indices in time and mean percentage change in those indices using different antimicrobial solutions.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were deemed eligible for inclusion, reporting on a total of 602 patients with an age range of 11-35 years. The experimental solution was a 0.06%, 0.12%, or 0.2% CHX mouthwash with the control either a placebo mouthwash or a selection from a variety of mouthwashes. Treatment duration varied from 1 day to almost 5 months and the follow-up period varied from 1 min to 5 months. Chlorhexidine mouthrinses led to reduced plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation during orthodontic treatment, while at the same time, some of the control group mouthrinses were deemed equally effective. No statistically significant difference was detected in the meta-analysis between CHX and mouthwashes with propolis/probiotics/herbs in terms of the gingival index at 3 to 4 weeks (mean difference 0.07, 95% CI: -0.18, 0.31, p = 0.59).
CONCLUSION
Chlorhexidine mouthwash in orthodontic patients successfully controls gingival inflammation and bleeding when compared to untreated controls, but is equally effective as other mouthrinses where various oral health indices are concerned.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Chlorhexidine; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Humans; Inflammation; Mouthwashes; Young Adult
PubMed: 35762364
DOI: 10.3290/j.ohpd.b3170043 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2019Periodontal (gum) disease and dental caries (tooth decay) are the most common causes of tooth loss; dental plaque plays a major role in the development of these...
BACKGROUND
Periodontal (gum) disease and dental caries (tooth decay) are the most common causes of tooth loss; dental plaque plays a major role in the development of these diseases. Effective oral hygiene involves removing dental plaque, for example, by regular toothbrushing. People with intellectual disabilities (ID) can have poor oral hygiene and oral health outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of oral hygiene interventions, specifically the mechanical removal of plaque, for people with intellectual disabilities (ID).
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases to 4 February 2019: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Cochrane Register of Studies), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid and PsycINFO Ovid. ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. The Embase search was restricted by date due to the Cochrane Centralised Search Project, which makes available clinical trials indexed in Embase through CENTRAL. We handsearched specialist conference abstracts from the International Association of Disability and Oral Health (2006 to 2016).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and some types of non-randomised studies (NRS) (non-RCTs, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series studies and repeated measures studies) that evaluated oral hygiene interventions targeted at people with ID or their carers, or both. We used the definition of ID in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision (ICD-10). We defined oral hygiene as the mechanical removal of plaque. We excluded studies that evaluated chemical removal of plaque, or mechanical and chemical removal of plaque combined.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently screened search records, identified relevant studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and judged the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE criteria. We contacted study authors for additional information if required. We reported RCTs and NRSs separately.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 19 RCTs and 15 NRSs involving 1795 adults and children with ID and 354 carers. Interventions evaluated were: special manual toothbrushes, electric toothbrushes, oral hygiene training, scheduled dental visits plus supervised toothbrushing, discussion of clinical photographs showing plaque, varied frequency of toothbrushing, plaque-disclosing agents and individualised care plans. We categorised results as short (six weeks or less), medium (between six weeks and 12 months) and long term (more than 12 months).Most studies were small; all were at overall high or unclear risk of bias. None of the studies reported quality of life or dental caries. We present below the evidence available from RCTs (or NRS if the comparison had no RCTs) for gingival health (inflammation and plaque) and adverse effects, as well as knowledge and behaviour outcomes for the training studies.Very low-certainty evidence suggested a special manual toothbrush (the Superbrush) reduced gingival inflammation (GI), and possibly plaque, more than a conventional toothbrush in the medium term (GI: mean difference (MD) -12.40, 95% CI -24.31 to -0.49; plaque: MD -0.44, 95% CI -0.93 to 0.05; 1 RCT, 18 participants); brushing was carried out by the carers. In the short term, neither toothbrush showed superiority (GI: MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.77 to 0.57; plaque: MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.85; 1 RCT, 25 participants; low- to very low-certainty evidence).Moderate- and low-certainty evidence found no difference between electric and manual toothbrushes for reducing GI or plaque, respectively, in the medium term (GI: MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.09; plaque: standardised mean difference 0.29, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.65; 2 RCTs, 120 participants). Short-term findings were inconsistent (4 RCTs; low- to very low-certainty evidence).Low-certainty evidence suggested training carers in oral hygiene care had no detectable effect on levels of GI or plaque in the medium term (GI: MD -0.09, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.45; plaque: MD -0.07, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.13; 2 RCTs, 99 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggested oral hygiene knowledge of carers was better in the medium term after training (MD 0.69, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.06; 2 RCTs, 189 participants); this was not found in the short term, and results for changes in behaviour, attitude and self-efficacy were mixed.One RCT (10 participants) found that training people with ID in oral hygiene care reduced plaque but not GI in the short term (GI: MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.90 to 0.34; plaque: MD -0.47, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.02; very low-certainty evidence).One RCT (304 participants) found that scheduled dental recall visits (at 1-, 3- or 6-month intervals) plus supervised daily toothbrushing were more likely than usual care to reduce GI (pocketing but not bleeding) and plaque in the long term (low-certainty evidence).One RCT (29 participants) found that motivating people with ID about oral hygiene by discussing photographs of their teeth with plaque highlighted by a plaque-disclosing agent, did not reduce plaque in the medium term (very low-certainty evidence).One RCT (80 participants) found daily toothbrushing by dental students was more effective for reducing plaque in people with ID than once- or twice-weekly toothbrushing in the short term (low-certainty evidence).A benefit to gingival health was found by one NRS that evaluated toothpaste with a plaque-disclosing agent and one that evaluated individualised oral care plans (very low-certainty evidence).Most studies did not report adverse effects; of those that did, only one study considered them as a formal outcome. Some studies reported participant difficulties using the electric or special manual toothbrushes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although some oral hygiene interventions for people with ID show benefits, the clinical importance of these benefits is unclear. The evidence is mainly low or very low certainty. Moderate-certainty evidence was available for only one finding: electric and manual toothbrushes were similarly effective for reducing gingival inflammation in people with ID in the medium term. Larger, higher-quality RCTs are recommended to endorse or refute the findings of this review. In the meantime, oral hygiene care and advice should be based on professional expertise and the needs and preferences of the individual with ID and their carers.
Topics: Dental Plaque; Humans; Intellectual Disability; Oral Health; Oral Hygiene; Periodontal Diseases; Toothbrushing
PubMed: 31149734
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012628.pub2 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Sep 2023Consumption of free sugars has been associated with chronic non-communicable diseases. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of free-sugar consumption on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Consumption of free sugars has been associated with chronic non-communicable diseases. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of free-sugar consumption on gingival inflammation using a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the PICO question 'What impact does the restriction of free sugars have on the inflammation of gingival tissue?'
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Literature review and analyses were based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Controlled clinical studies reporting on free-sugar interventions and gingival inflammation were included. Risk of bias was performed with ROBINS-I and ROB-2, and effect sizes were estimated with robust variance meta-regressions.
RESULTS
Of the 1777 primarily identified studies, 1768 were excluded, and 9 studies with 209 participants with gingival inflammation measures were included. Six of these studies reported on the dental plaque scores of 113 participants. Restriction of free sugars, when compared with no such restriction, was associated with statistically significantly improved gingival health scores (standard mean difference [SMD] = -0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.43 to -0.42, p < .004; I [heterogeneity] = 46.8) and a trend towards lower dental plaque scores (SMD = -0.61; 95% CI: -1.28 to 0.05, p < .07; I = 41.3). The observed improvement of gingival inflammation scores with restricted consumption of free sugar was robust against various statistical imputations. No meta-regression models were feasible because of the limited number of studies. The median publication year was 1982. Risk-of-bias analysis showed a moderate risk in all studies.
CONCLUSION
Restriction of free sugar was shown to be associated with reduced gingival inflammation. The systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (CRD 42020157914).
Topics: Humans; Dental Plaque; Sugars; Gingivitis; Inflammation; Dental Plaque Index
PubMed: 37246336
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13831 -
Phytotherapy Research : PTR Feb 2018This is a systematic review of clinical and laboratory studies evaluating the effect of Melaleuca alternifolia on periodontopathogens, dental plaque, gingivitis,... (Review)
Review
This is a systematic review of clinical and laboratory studies evaluating the effect of Melaleuca alternifolia on periodontopathogens, dental plaque, gingivitis, periodontitis, and inflammatory responses. The PubMed, Cochrane, Web of science, Bireme, Lilacs, Prospero, Open Grey, and Clinical Trials databases were searched to identify potentially eligible studies through October 2016. Of 1,654 potentially eligible studies, 25 were included in the systematic review. Their methodology was evaluated through the Cochrane Handbook for clinical studies and the GRADE system for in vivo/in vitro studies. Although clinical studies must be interpreted with caution due to methodological limitations, laboratory studies have found promising results. In vitro evidences showed that M. alternifolia has bactericidal and bacteriostatic effects against the most prevalent periodontopathogens. Clinical studies found comparable effects to chlorhexidine 0.12% in reducing gingival inflammation, although the antiplaque effect was lower. M. alternifolia also showed antioxidant properties, which are beneficial to the host, allied to the reduction on immune-inflammatory responses to pathogens. This systematic review suggests that the M. alternifolia has potential anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial properties, which can be easily applied to the periodontal tissues. However, further clinical trials are needed to elucidate the clinical relevance of its application.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dental Plaque; Humans; Melaleuca; Periodontal Diseases
PubMed: 29235165
DOI: 10.1002/ptr.5974 -
TheScientificWorldJournal 2014The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the efficacy of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (PDTa) on cariogenic dental biofilm. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the efficacy of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (PDTa) on cariogenic dental biofilm.
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED
Studies in vivo, in vitro, and in situ were included. Articles that did not address PDTa, those that did not involve cariogenic biofilm, those that used microorganisms in the plankton phase, and reviews were excluded. Data extraction and quality assessments were performed independently by two raters using a scale.
RESULTS
Two hundred forty articles were retrieved; only seventeen of them met the eligibility criteria and were analyzed in the present review. Considerable variability was found regarding the methodologies and application protocols for antimicrobial PDTa. Two articles reported unfavorable results.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
The present systematic review does not allow drawing any concrete conclusions regarding the efficacy of antimicrobial PDTa, although this method seems to be a promising option.
Topics: Biofilms; Dental Caries; Dental Plaque; Humans; Light; Methylene Blue; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Streptococcus; Tolonium Chloride
PubMed: 25379545
DOI: 10.1155/2014/824538 -
Brazilian Dental Journal 2019The aim of presented systematic scoping review was to investigate the actual and future clinical possibilities of regenerative therapies and their ability to regenerate...
The aim of presented systematic scoping review was to investigate the actual and future clinical possibilities of regenerative therapies and their ability to regenerate bone, periodontal and pulp with histological confirmation of the nature of formed tissue. Electronic search was conducted using a combination between Keywords and MeSH terms in PubMed, Scopus, ISI-Web of Science and Cochrane library databases up to January 2016. Two reviewers conducted independently the papers judgment. Screened studies were read following the predetermined inclusion criteria. The included studies were evaluated in accordance with Arksey and O'Malley's modified framework. From 1349 papers, 168 completed inclusion criteria. Several characterized and uncharacterized cells used in Cell Therapy have provided bone regeneration, demonstrating bone gain in quantity and quality, even as accelerators for bone and periodontal regeneration. Synthetic and natural scaffolds presented good cell maintenance, however polyglycolid-polylactid presented faster resorption and consequently poor bone gain. The Growth Factor-Mediated Therapy was able to regenerate bone and all features of a periodontal tissue in bone defects. Teeth submitted to Revascularization presented an increase of length and width of root canal. However, formed tissues not seem able to deposit dentin, characterizing a repaired tissue. Both PRP and PRF presented benefits when applied in regenerative therapies as natural scaffolds. Therefore, most studies that applied regenerative therapies have provided promising results being possible to regenerate bone and periodontal tissue with histological confirmation. However, pulp regeneration was not reported. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the short follow-up periods.
Topics: Bone Regeneration; Dental Pulp; Dentin; Periodontium; Root Canal Therapy
PubMed: 30970065
DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201902053 -
Cureus Mar 2022Mouthwash is the effective chemical plaque control mechanism being practiced globally. Teeth and tongue discoloration, a temporary change in taste perception, an... (Review)
Review
Mouthwash is the effective chemical plaque control mechanism being practiced globally. Teeth and tongue discoloration, a temporary change in taste perception, an increase in calculus deposits, a burning sensation, and genotoxicity of buccal epithelial cells are all possible side effects. This review evaluates the efficacy of chitosan mouthwash in comparison to chlorhexidine mouthwash in combating plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation. Electronic databases such as Medline, Cochrane, LILACS, TRIP, Google scholar, and clinical trial registries (CTRI) for ongoing trials were searched with appropriate medical subheadings (MeSH) and search terms. Randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy of chitosan mouthwash and chlorhexidine mouthwash on dental plaque accumulation and gingivitis were included. The outcome variables of interest were plaque index, gingival index, gingival bleeding index, and colony-forming unit (CFU/ml). All data from the included studies were extracted in a customized extraction sheet. The risk of bias across the studies was assessed using the Cochrane tool for intervention (ROB-2), which consisted of six domains. Of the included three studies, we found one study with an overall low risk of bias and two studies with an overall high risk of bias across the domains. Though there was a significant reduction in plaque accumulation, gingival inflammation, and colony-forming units on the use of chitosan mouthwash and chlorhexidine mouthwash separately, all three included studies reported that a combination of both be more effective.
PubMed: 35464533
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.23318