-
Medicina Clinica Feb 2014There are no clearly established protocols for the treatment of dry mouth. The aim of this paper is a systematic review of the literature of the past 10 years using the... (Review)
Review
There are no clearly established protocols for the treatment of dry mouth. The aim of this paper is a systematic review of the literature of the past 10 years using the words « dry mouth », « prognosis », « treatment » and « dentistry ». The initial search found 1,450 entries and within the restriction « clinical trials OR randomized controlled trial OR systemic reviews » it has been reduced to 522, which 145 were meta-analysis and systematic reviews. Papers not relevant to the issue were removed reducing the entries to 53. Twenty-four were dismissed (8 irrelevant, 7 reviews without adequate information and 9 personal opinions). Of the 29 items tested, 15 were controlled trials, 2 uncontrolled trials, 4 observational studies, 2 systematic reviews and 5 non systematic reviews. The most studied patients were Sjögren's syndrome and the irradiated patients. Treatments are focused on the etiology, prevention, symptomatic, local salivary stimulation and systemic treatments. It can be concluded that treatment must be individualized, salivary substitutes and mechanical stimulation techniques can be applied.
Topics: Cholinergic Antagonists; Clinical Trials as Topic; Dental Caries; Disease Susceptibility; Double-Blind Method; Fluid Therapy; Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Mouthwashes; Observational Studies as Topic; Pilocarpine; Prognosis; Quinuclidines; Radiation Injuries; Radiotherapy; Saliva, Artificial; Salivation; Sjogren's Syndrome; Thiophenes; Xerostomia
PubMed: 23726507
DOI: 10.1016/j.medcli.2013.02.036 -
The Journal of Hospital Infection Apr 2021The most effective skin antiseptic solution to reduce the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) remains unknown. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The most effective skin antiseptic solution to reduce the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) remains unknown.
AIM
To compare solutions with different chlorhexidine (CHG)-based concentrations and povidone-iodine (PVI) in adults with a central venous catheter (CVC) or arterial catheter, and identify an association with the incidence of CRBSI.
METHODS
This study evaluated randomized controlled trials comparing CHG and PVI antiseptic agents in patients aged ≥18 years with an underlying illness and a CVC or arterial catheter. The primary outcome was CRBSI rate. Network meta-analysis was performed by a frequentist-based approach with multi-variate random effects meta-analysis, and the effect size was expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
FINDINGS
The search yielded 1511 records, of which five studies (2815 catheters) were included in the network meta-analysis. The risk of CRBSI was significantly lower with 1% CHG-alcohol than with 0.5% CHG-alcohol (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.16-0.98; high certainty) or 10% PVI-aqueous (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.63; high certainty). There was no significant difference in the risk of CRBSI between 1% CHG-alcohol and 2% CHG-aqueous (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12-1.04; moderate certainty) or other antiseptic solutions. The hierarchy of efficacy in reducing CRBSI was 1% CHG-alcohol, 0.5% CHG-alcohol, 2% CHG-aqueous and 10% PVI-aqueous.
CONCLUSION
Antiseptic agents containing 1% CHG-alcohol were more strongly associated with reduced risk for CRBSI compared with agents containing 0.5% CHG-alcohol or 10% PVI-aqueous.
Topics: Adult; Alcohols; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Catheter-Related Infections; Catheterization, Central Venous; Central Venous Catheters; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Incidence; Network Meta-Analysis; Povidone-Iodine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sepsis
PubMed: 33529623
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.01.017 -
Journal of Dental Research Aug 2014The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature for in vitro and ex vivo studies that evaluated the effect of matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) inhibitors... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature for in vitro and ex vivo studies that evaluated the effect of matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) inhibitors during the adhesive procedure on the immediate and long-term resin-dentin bond strength. The search was conducted in 6 databases with no publication year or language limits, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. From 1,336 potentially eligible studies, 48 were selected for full-text analysis, and 30 were included for review, with 17 considered in the meta-analysis. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Pooled effect estimates were expressed as the weighted mean difference between groups. The most used MMP inhibitor was chlorhexidine (CHX). Immediate bond strength results showed no difference between 2% CHX and control; however, a difference was found between 0.2% CHX and control at baseline. After aging, CHX presented higher bond strength values compared to control groups (p < .05). However, this was not observed for longer periods of aging. High heterogeneity was found in some comparisons, especially for the water storage aging subgroup. Subgroup analyses showed that self-etching and etch-and-rinse adhesives are benefited by the CHX use. From the studies included, only 1 presented low risk of bias, while the others showed medium or high risk of bias. The use of MMP inhibitors did not affect the immediate bond strength overall, while it influenced the aged bond strength. Aging procedures influenced bond strength values of the dentin adhesion stability.
Topics: Acid Etching, Dental; Chlorhexidine; Dental Bonding; Dentin; Humans; Matrix Metalloproteinase Inhibitors; Stress, Mechanical; Time Factors
PubMed: 24935066
DOI: 10.1177/0022034514538046 -
International Journal of Environmental... Sep 2022Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global and evolving pandemic associated with heavy health and financial burdens. Considering the oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global and evolving pandemic associated with heavy health and financial burdens. Considering the oral cavity as the major reservoir for SARS-CoV-2, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays in reducing the salivary viral load of SARS-CoV-2. All and studies that assessed the virucidal efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays against SARS-CoV-2 and were published in the English language from December 2019 to April 2022 were considered for analyses. Special Medical Subject Headings terms were used to search Pubmed, Scopus, Embase Ovid, and Web of Science databases. The toxicological data reliability assessment tool (ToxRToool) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Thirty-three studies (11 and 22 ) were deemed eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Results of the pooled data showed that povidone-iodine is the most efficacious intervention in terms of reducing the SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load, followed by chlorhexidine. The mean difference in the viral load was 86% and 72%, respectively. Similarly, povidone-iodine was associated with the highest log reduction value (LRV) , followed by cetylpyridinium chloride, (LRV = 2.938 ( < 0.0005) and LRV = 2.907 ( = 0.009), respectively). Povidone-iodine-based oral and nasal preparations showed favourable results in terms of reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral loads both and . Considering the limited number of patients , further studies among larger cohorts are recommended.
Topics: COVID-19; Cetylpyridinium; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Mouthwashes; Nasal Sprays; Povidone-Iodine; Reproducibility of Results; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 36231450
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912148 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2023Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication of surgery, increasing healthcare costs and hospital stay. Chlorhexidine (CHX) and povidone-iodine (PVI)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication of surgery, increasing healthcare costs and hospital stay. Chlorhexidine (CHX) and povidone-iodine (PVI) are used for skin antisepsis, minimising SSIs. There is concern that resistance to topical biocides may be emergeing, although the potential clinical implications remain unclear. The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether the minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of topical preparations of CHX or PVI have changed over time, in microbes relevant to SSI. We included studies reporting the MBC of laboratory and clinical isolates of common microbes to CHX and PVI. We excluded studies using non-human samples and antimicrobial solvents or mixtures with other active substances. MBC was pooled in random effects meta-analyses and the change in MBC over time was explored using meta-regression. Seventy-nine studies were included, analysing 6218 microbes over 45 years. Most studies investigated CHX (93%), with insufficient data for meta-analysis of PVI. There was no change in the MBC of CHX to Staphylococci or Streptococci over time. Overall, we find no evidence of reduced susceptibility of common SSI-causing microbes to CHX over time. This provides reassurance and confidence in the worldwide guidance that CHX should remain the first-choice agent for surgical skin antisepsis.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Povidone-Iodine; Chlorhexidine; Preoperative Care; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 36611032
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-26658-1 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jun 2023To answer the following PICOS question: "In adult patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with chemical surface decontamination of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To answer the following PICOS question: "In adult patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with chemical surface decontamination of implant surfaces in comparison with surgical therapy alone or surgery with placebo decontamination, on probing pocket depth (PD) reduction and bleeding on probing (BoP)/suppuration on probing (SoP), in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs with at least 6 months of follow-up?"
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Six databases were searched from their inception up to 20 May 2022. Data on clinical outcome variables were pooled and analysed using mean differences (MDs), risk ratios (RRs), or risk differences (RDs) as appropriate, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and prediction intervals (PIs) in the case of significant heterogeneity. Primary outcomes were determined as changes in PD and BoP/SoP. Secondary outcomes were radiographic marginal bone loss (MBL), implant loss, and disease resolution. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022325603.
RESULTS
Six RCTs-two with moderate, three with high, and one with low risk of bias (RoB)-were included. These studies test the adjunctive effect of photodynamic therapy (PDT), chlorhexidine (CHX), and administration of local antibiotics (LAbs) during surgery on the clinical outcome. In a single 12-month study, the adjunctive use of local antibiotics showed a clinically relevant reduction of PD [MD = 1.44; 95%CI (0.40 to -2.48)] and MBL [MD = 1.21; 95%CI (0.44-1.98); one trial, 32 participants]. PDT showed a small but significant reduction in BoP [MD = 7.41%; 95%CI (0.81-14.00); p = 0.028; two trials; 42 participants]. Treatment with CHX resulted in no significant changes in PD, BoP, or MBL compared to placebo (saline solution). None of the interventions affected disease resolution and implant loss. Certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcome measures assessed.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of this systematic review and the meta-analysis, adjunctive use of chemicals such as PDT, CHX, and LAbs for surface decontamination during surgery of peri-implantitis cannot be recommended as superior to standard debridement procedures (mechanical debridement with or without saline).
Topics: Adult; Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chlorhexidine; Decontamination; Dental Implants; Peri-Implantitis; Disinfection
PubMed: 36792071
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13794 -
The Journal of Surgical Research Nov 2023The use of optimal skin antiseptic agents for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) is of critical importance, especially during abdominal surgical procedures.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
The use of optimal skin antiseptic agents for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) is of critical importance, especially during abdominal surgical procedures. Alcohol-based chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) and aqueous-based povidone-iodine (PVI) are the two most common skin antiseptics used nowadays. The objective of this article is to evaluate the effectiveness of alcohol-based CHG versus aqueous-based PVI used for skin preparation before abdominal surgery to reduce SSIs.
METHODS
Standard medical databases such as MEDLINE, Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library were searched to find randomized, controlled trials comparing alcohol-based CHG skin preparation versus aqueous-based PVI in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. The combined outcomes of SSIs were calculated using odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. All data were analyzed using Review Manager Software 5.4, and the meta-analysis was performed with a random effect model analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 11 studies, all randomized, controlled trials, were included (n = 12,072 participants), recruiting adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery. In the random effect model analysis, the use of alcohol-based CHG in patients undergoing abdominal surgery was associated with a reduced risk of SSI compared to aqueous-based PVI (odds ratio: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [0.74, 0.96], z = 2.61, P = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS
Alcohol-based CHG may be more effective for preventing the risk of SSI compared to aqueous-based PVI agents in abdominal surgery. The conclusion of this meta-analysis may add a guiding value to reinforce current clinical practice guidelines.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Preoperative Care; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Povidone-Iodine; Ethanol; Chlorhexidine; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 37573638
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2023.06.011 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene May 2015To systematically review and evaluate the available scientific evidence on the effectiveness of chlorhexidine dentifrice or gel (CHX DF/gel) compared to chlorhexidine... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review and evaluate the available scientific evidence on the effectiveness of chlorhexidine dentifrice or gel (CHX DF/gel) compared to chlorhexidine mouthwash (CHX MW) on plaque, bleeding, gingival inflammation and tooth discoloration scores.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL and EMBASE databases were searched to identify appropriate studies.
RESULTS
Independent screening of the 2256 unique titles and abstracts resulted in five publications that met the eligibility criteria. Considerable heterogeneity was found between the studies. Three of the five studies showed a positive effect on plaque scores in favour of the CHX MW. With respect to gingival index and bleeding scores, no significant differences were found. Chlorhexidine mouthwash, however, showed a significantly more tooth discoloration than the CHX DF/gel. A meta-analysis of the effect on 'de novo' plaque formation of CHX DF/gel versus CHX MW resulted in a difference in means of 0.27 [95% CI: 0.14; 0.39] (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Chlorhexidine gel can be successfully formulated and will inhibit plaque growth to some degree, but not to the same extent, as a CHX MW. When CHX DF/gel is used in a non-brushing model, it is significantly less effective in plaque inhibition compared to CHX MW. Based on one study when CHX gel was applied with a finger after brushing, it is significantly more effective on plaque scores and the gingival index. The only brushing study also with a long follow-up showed that there is no significant difference between CHX DF and CHX MW. However, as a corollary, significantly more tooth discoloration was observed with the CHX MW. Altogether, the data show that when daily oral hygiene cannot be performed, CHX MW is the first product of choice.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chlorhexidine; Dental Plaque; Dental Plaque Index; Dentifrices; Gels; Gingival Hemorrhage; Gingivitis; Humans; Mouthwashes; Periodontal Index; Tooth Discoloration
PubMed: 25059640
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12078 -
Minerva Dental and Oral Science Oct 2021Antiseptic mouthwash is widely recommended to treat various oral diseases as well as to improve oral health. Most of the dental procedures lead to the generation of...
INTRODUCTION
Antiseptic mouthwash is widely recommended to treat various oral diseases as well as to improve oral health. Most of the dental procedures lead to the generation of aerosols. These aerosols have a high potential to transmit disease. Preprocedural oral rinse with antimicrobial agents in the form of mouthwashes reduces the bacterial and viral load many folds. The purpose of this review was to summarize the effectiveness of mouthwash against viruses affecting human beings.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Search engines like PubMed, Google Scholar, and others were used to search the electronic database. Articles were identified in which the effectiveness of antiseptic mouth rinse against the virus was tested. A comprehensive search strategy was designed to select the articles and then independently screened for eligibility.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 9624 articles out of the 13 titles met the eligibility criteria. The selected papers were included in the present manuscript according to their relevance to the topic. Authors searched the most used chemicals as mouthwashes but records of three types of mouthwash tested against various types of viruses i.e. chlorhexidine gluconate, Povidone-iodine and essential oil containing mouthwash (Listerine) were found.
CONCLUSIONS
Povidone-iodine mouth rinse is effective in reducing viral load either in-vitro or in-vivo conditions. Chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash and essential oils have shown its effectiveness in a few studies. Insufficient evidence is available to support the claim that oral antiseptics can reduce the risk of developing viral loads in humans or the rate of progression of diseases caused by viruses.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Humans; Mouthwashes; Oral Health; Povidone-Iodine; Viruses
PubMed: 34842407
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04418-6 -
Phytotherapy Research : PTR May 2019The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of turmeric and curcumin in the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients undergoing chemo and/or radiotherapy....
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of turmeric and curcumin in the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients undergoing chemo and/or radiotherapy. The systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses. The search was performed in the following database: Cochrane Library, LILACS, LIVIVO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. A gray literature search was undertaken using Google Scholar, Open Grey, and ProQuest. The methodology of included studies was evaluated by the Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument. After a two-step selection process, four randomized and one nonrandomized clinical trials were included in the analysis. Two studies were categorized as low and three as moderate risk of bias. Turmeric/curcumin was applied topically as a gel or as a mouthwash. Patients treated with turmeric/curcumin experienced reduced grade of mucositis, pain, erythema intensity, and ulcerative area. Current evidence suggests that topical application of turmeric or curcumin is effective in controlling signs and symptoms of oral mucositis. Thus, further investigation is required to confirm the promising effect of turmeric and curcumin in oral inflammatory lesions.
Topics: Curcuma; Curcumin; Humans; Neoplasms; Stomatitis
PubMed: 30838707
DOI: 10.1002/ptr.6326