-
Clinical Oral Investigations Dec 2022A systematic review of published data was conducted with the aim of assessing the effects of sugar-free polyol chewing gums on gingival inflammation. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
A systematic review of published data was conducted with the aim of assessing the effects of sugar-free polyol chewing gums on gingival inflammation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Electronic and hand searches were performed to find clinical studies concerning the effects of sugar-free chewing gums on gingival scores. Prospective randomized controlled clinical trials published between 1971 and 2021 were included in the review.
RESULTS
The initial search identified 46 erythritol, 102 xylitol, 23 sorbitol, and nine maltitol chewing gum articles. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, seven xylitol chewing gum studies, one sorbitol, and one maltitol chewing gum study with either high or fair quality were reviewed. In five out of the seven xylitol studies, xylitol gum decreased gingival scores. In two studies, xylitol decreased gingival scores compared to a polyol gum, and in three studies compared to no gum/gum base. As for sorbitol and maltitol, only sorbitol gum chewing showed a small decrease in gingival scores compared to the controls.
CONCLUSIONS
Habitual xylitol gum chewing may reduce gingival inflammation. The low number of studies and their heterogeneity provide clear indications that the effects of sugar-free polyol chewing gums on gingival inflammation need further, well-controlled studies.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Sugar-free chewing gums, especially xylitol gum, may function as adjuncts to toothbrushing for reducing gingival inflammation, but the evidence so far is inconclusive.
Topics: Humans; Chewing Gum; Xylitol; Dental Plaque; Prospective Studies; Gingivitis; Sorbitol; Inflammation
PubMed: 36239787
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04729-x -
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 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jun 2022This systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy of herbal agents with ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) in removing the smear layer during root canal... (Review)
Review
This systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy of herbal agents with ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) in removing the smear layer during root canal instrumentation. The research question in the present study was to assess: "Is there a significant difference in reducing smear layer comparing EDTA and herbal agents?" Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched from their start dates to April 2022 using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, and reviewed following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines. Only in vitro studies comparing herbal agents with EDTA were included in the current systematic review. Two reviewers independently assessed the included articles. A total of 625 articles were obtained from an electronic database. Eighteen papers were included for review of the full text, out of which, ten papers were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, eight articles were included in the systematic review. The present systematic review considered only in vitro studies; hence, the result cannot be completely translated to strict clinical conditions. The results of the present systematic review have shown that extract, and neem show better smear layer removal compared to other herbal agents, whereas they showed reduced smear layer removal when compared with EDTA. Although, it was seen that most of the included studies did not report a high quality of evidence. Hence, the present systematic review concludes that herbal agents have reported to show inferior smear layer removal when compared to EDTA. Thus, as far as herbal based alternatives are concerned, there is no highest level of evidence to state its real benefit when used as a chelating root canal irrigant.
Topics: Acetic Acid; Chelating Agents; Edetic Acid; Ethylenes; Humans; Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; Root Canal Preparation; Smear Layer; Sodium Hypochlorite
PubMed: 35682452
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19116870 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene Feb 2023To establish the efficacy of oscillating-rotating power toothbrush (OR-PTB) compared to high-frequency sonic power toothbrush (HFS-PTB) on improving parameters of plaque... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The efficacy of an oscillating-rotating power toothbrush compared to a high-frequency sonic power toothbrush on parameters of dental plaque and gingival inflammation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
AIM
To establish the efficacy of oscillating-rotating power toothbrush (OR-PTB) compared to high-frequency sonic power toothbrush (HFS-PTB) on improving parameters of plaque and gingival inflammation. Safety and participants' preference were secondary interests.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
MEDLINE-PubMed and Cochrane-CENTRAL databases were searched, up to April 2021. Inclusion criteria were (randomized)controlled clinical trials that evaluated healthy humans brushing with an OR-PTB compared to a HFS-PTB. Evaluation for a minimum of 4 weeks, of one or more of the following parameters: plaque index scores (PI), bleeding scores (BS), number of bleeding sites (NoB) and gingival index scores (GI).
RESULTS
Thirty two publications involving 38 comparisons were included after the independent screening. The descriptive analysis showed that in 54% of the comparisons, a significant difference in favour of the OR-PTB was found for PI, BS and GI scores. The Quigley and Hein index showed a significant difference of means (DiffM) between the end scores (DiffM 0.13, 95% CI [0.05;0.21] p < 0.001), as well as for the Rustogi-modified Navy index (DiffM 0.01, 95% CI [0.01;0.03] p = 0.002). This is in line with the meta-analysis for BS (DiffM 0.09, 95% CI [0.03;0.14] p = 0.003), for which the results were in favour of the OR-PTB and considered potentially clinically relevant. NoB showed a significant difference in favour of the OR-PTB for the end scores (DiffM 3.61, 95% CI [2.63;4.58] p < 0.00001). No difference in safety was indicated, 78% of participants preferred the OR-PTB.
CONCLUSION
For patients to maintain good plaque control and improve gingival health, there is a small but significant difference based on longer-term studies between OR-PTB and HFS-PTB. This difference is potentially clinically relevant.
Topics: Humans; Dental Plaque; Equipment Design; Single-Blind Method; Toothbrushing; Gingivitis; Dental Plaque Index; Inflammation
PubMed: 35535635
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12597 -
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 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene Feb 2022This systematic review and network meta-analysis synthesizes the available clinical evidence concerning efficacy with respect to plaque scores following a brushing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
This systematic review and network meta-analysis synthesizes the available clinical evidence concerning efficacy with respect to plaque scores following a brushing action with oscillating-rotating (OR) or high-frequency sonic (HFS) powered toothbrushes (PTB) compared with a manual toothbrush (MTB) as control.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Databases were searched up to 1 August 2021, for clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy of a PTB with OR or HFS technology compared with an MTB on plaque removal after a single-brushing action and conducted with healthy adult patients. Meta-analysis (MA) and a network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight eligible publications, including 56 relevant comparisons, were retrieved. The overall NMA results for the mean post-brushing score showed a statistically significant difference for the comparison between an OR PTB and an MTB (SMD = -0.43; 95% CI [-0.696;-0.171]). The change in plaque score data showed a significant effect of a PTB over an MTB and OR over HFS. Based on ranking, the OR PTB was highest, followed by the HFS PTB and the MTB.
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of the present study design, based on the outcome following a single-brushing action, it can be concluded that for dental plaque removal, there is a high certainty for a small effect of a PTB over an MTB. This supports the recommendation to use a powered toothbrush for daily plaque removal. There is moderate certainty for a very small benefit for the use of a powered toothbrush with an OR over an HFS mode of action.
Topics: Adult; Dental Plaque; Dental Plaque Index; Equipment Design; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Single-Blind Method; Toothbrushing
PubMed: 34877772
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12563 -
Microbial colonisation associated with conventional and self-ligating brackets: a systematic review.Journal of Orthodontics Jun 2022Decalcification and gingivitis caused by plaque accumulation around brackets are common iatrogenic effects of fixed appliances. The influence of conventional versus...
BACKGROUND
Decalcification and gingivitis caused by plaque accumulation around brackets are common iatrogenic effects of fixed appliances. The influence of conventional versus self-ligating bracket design on microbial colonisation is unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the levels of microbial colonisation associated with conventional and self-ligating brackets.
SEARCH SOURCES
Three databases were searched for publications from 2009 to 2021.
DATA SELECTION
Randomised controlled trials comparing levels of microbial colonisation before and during treatment with conventional and self-ligating brackets were assessed independently and in duplicate.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data were extracted independently by two authors from the studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias assessments were made using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist.
RESULTS
A total of 11 randomised controlled trials were included in this systematic review. Six of the studies were found to be at low risk of bias and five presented with some concerns. The studies were considered moderate to high quality. Five trials reported no statistically significant difference in microbial colonisation between bracket types. The remaining studies showed mixed results, with some reporting increased colonisation of conventional brackets and others increased colonisation of self-ligating brackets. The heterogeneity of study methods and outcomes precluded meta-analysis.
CONCLUSION
Of the 11 studies included in this systematic review, five found no differences in colonisation between conventional and self-ligating brackets. The remaining studies showed mixed results. The evidence is inconclusive regarding the association between bracket design and levels of microbial colonisation.
Topics: Dental Plaque; Humans; Orthodontic Appliance Design; Orthodontic Brackets; Orthodontic Wires
PubMed: 34839734
DOI: 10.1177/14653125211056023 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Jan 2022A systematic review of published data was conducted with the aim of assessing the effects of xylitol consumption on the amount of dental plaque. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
A systematic review of published data was conducted with the aim of assessing the effects of xylitol consumption on the amount of dental plaque.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Electronic and hand searches were performed to find clinical studies concerning the effects of xylitol chewing gum or candies on dental plaque. Prospective randomized controlled clinical trials published between 1971 and 2020 conducted in healthy subjects were included in the review.
RESULTS
The initial search identified 424 xylitol articles. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, altogether 14 articles (16 studies) were reviewed. The review identified 12 of the total of 14 xylitol chewing gum studies as having fair or high quality. In 13 of the 14 chewing gum studies, xylitol gum decreased plaque accumulation. In six studies, xylitol gum chewing decreased plaque compared to sorbitol gum, and in three studies compared to gum base/no gum. In three fair-quality studies conducted with xylitol candies, plaque accumulation did not change.
CONCLUSIONS
Habitual xylitol gum chewing appears to show plaque-reducing effects that differ from those of sorbitol gum. This suggests specific effects for xylitol on plaque accumulation. Xylitol candies appear not to decrease plaque. The heterogeneity of the studies warrants further research. Clinical relevance Habitual xylitol gum chewing is likely to decrease plaque.
Topics: Chewing Gum; Dental Plaque; Dental Plaque Index; Humans; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sorbitol; Xylitol
PubMed: 34677696
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-04225-8 -
Planta Medica Apr 2022is a typical shrub from Brazil that has been used in traditional medicine. This is a systematic review on the effect of for controlling dental plaque, gingivitis, and...
is a typical shrub from Brazil that has been used in traditional medicine. This is a systematic review on the effect of for controlling dental plaque, gingivitis, and periodontitis. A database search through May 2021 in Medline/PubMed, SCOPUS, BVS, and Web of Science identified 711 reports of which 17 met our inclusion criteria. Five randomized controlled trials and three animal studies were included that compared -based products (toothpaste, mouthrinse, and gel) to cetylpyridinium chloride, chlorhexidine, and placebo products. Among the human studies, a significant antiplaque effect after treatment with -based products was observed in three studies and an antigingivitis effect in two studies, similar to chlorhexidine-based products. One study found superior dental plaque reduction compared to cetylpyridinium chloride mouthrinse. Only one study testing a gel found no antiplaque effect. Among the animal studies, an mouthrinse significantly reduced calculus in two studies, inflammatory infiltrate in one study, and plaque bacteria and gingivitis in one study. An gel significantly reduced alveolar bone loss and inflammatory response in one study in which mice were submitted to ligature-induced periodontal disease. In general, -based products were effective in reducing dental plaque and calculus formation, as well as clinical signs of gingivitis. As most studies present methodological limitations, these results should be interpreted carefully. Further clinical trials with greater methodological accuracy and control of biases are necessary for the use of -based products in humans to be viable in clinical practice.
Topics: Animals; Calculi; Cetylpyridinium; Chlorhexidine; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Lippia; Mice; Mouthwashes
PubMed: 34598290
DOI: 10.1055/a-1554-6947 -
International Journal of Molecular... Aug 2021Down syndrome (DS) is a genetic disorder associated with early-onset periodontitis and other periodontal diseases (PDs). The present work aimed to systematically review... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Down syndrome (DS) is a genetic disorder associated with early-onset periodontitis and other periodontal diseases (PDs). The present work aimed to systematically review the scientific literature reporting studies in vivo on oral microbiota features in subjects with DS and related periodontal health and to highlight any correlation and difference with subjects not affected by DS, with and without PDs. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane were searched for relevant studies in May 2021. The participants were subjects affected by Down syndrome (DS) with and without periodontal diseases; the study compared subjects with periodontal diseases but not affected by DS, and DS without periodontal diseases; the outcomes were the differences in oral microbiota/periodontopathogen bacterial composition among subjects considered; the study design was a systematic review. Study quality was assessed with risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I). Of the 954 references retrieved, 26 studies were considered. The conclusions from the qualitative assessment of the papers revealed an increasing knowledge over the last years of the microbiota associated with DS and their periodontal diseases, in comparison with healthy subjects and subjects with other kinds of mental disabilities. Few data have emerged on the mycobiome and virobiome of DS, hence, further investigations are still necessary.
Topics: Biofilms; Dental Plaque; Down Syndrome; Gingivitis; Humans; Microbiota; Mouth; Periodontal Diseases
PubMed: 34502159
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22179251