Clinic for Periodontology, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
J Periodontol. 2011 Feb;82(2):174-94. doi: 10.1902/jop.2010.100266. Epub 2010 Nov 2.
The purpose of this review is to systematically evaluate the effects of an essential-oil mouthwash (EOMW) compared to a chlorhexidine mouthwash with respect to plaque and parameters of gingival inflammation.
PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched for studies up to and including September 2010 to identify appropriate articles. A comprehensive search was designed, and the articles were independently screened for eligibility by two reviewers. Articles that evaluated the effects of the EOMW compared to chlorhexidine mouthwash were included. Where appropriate, a meta-analysis was performed, and weighted mean differences (WMDs) were calculated.
A total of 390 unique articles were found, of which 19 articles met the eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis of long-term studies (duration ≥ 4 weeks) showed that the chlorhexidine mouthwash provided significantly better effects regarding plaque control than EOMW (WMD: 0.19; P = 0.0009). No significant difference with respect to reduction of gingival inflammation was found between EOMW and chlorhexidine mouthwash (WMD: 0.03; P = 0.58).
In long-term use, the standardized formulation of EOMW appeared to be a reliable alternative to chlorhexidine mouthwash with respect to parameters of gingival inflammation.
本综述的目的是系统评估与洗必泰相比，使用含精油漱口水（EOMW）对菌斑和牙龈炎症参数的影响。
对截至 2010 年 9 月的 PubMed/MEDLINE 和 Cochrane CENTRAL 数据库进行检索，以确定合适的文章。设计了全面的检索策略，并由两名评审员独立筛选文章的入选标准。评估 EOMW 与洗必泰相比效果的文章被纳入。在适当的情况下，进行了荟萃分析，并计算了加权均数差（WMD）。
共发现 390 篇独特的文章，其中 19 篇符合入选标准。对长期研究（持续时间≥4 周）的荟萃分析显示，洗必泰在菌斑控制方面的效果明显优于 EOMW（WMD：0.19；P=0.0009）。EOMW 和洗必泰在减少牙龈炎症方面没有显著差异（WMD：0.03；P=0.58）。
在长期使用中，标准化配方的 EOMW 似乎是洗必泰的可靠替代品，在牙龈炎症参数方面。
