Brecx M, Netuschil L, Reichert B, Schreil G
Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Tübingen, FRG.
J Clin Periodontol. 1990 May;17(5):292-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1990.tb01092.x.
The experimental gingivitis model was used to compare the anti-plaque, anti-gingivitis and anti-microbial efficacies of a phenolic compound (Listerine) and an amine/stannous fluoride mouthwash (Meridol), using a placebo preparation as negative control and a chlorhexidine solution as positive control in a double-blind study. After professional toothcleaning, 36 volunteers performed optimal oral hygiene for a period of 2 weeks. They then ceased all oral hygiene procedures for 21 days during which they rinsed twice daily with 1 of the 4 mouthrinses. After 3 weeks of rinsing, plaque indices remained the lowest in the chlorhexidine group, while subjects using Listerine or Meridol harbored similar indices significantly lower than that of individuals rinsing with the placebo solution. Up to that time, the gingival index scores were equal in all groups except for the chlorhexidine group in which the values only amounted to half of these encountered in the other groups. The plaque vitality scores showed a bactericidal effect in vivo of chlorhexidine during the entire time of experimental gingivitis. In contrast, the data gave no evidence of an antibacterial effect in vivo of Listerine. The efficacy of Meridol to kill micro-organisms was similar to chlorhexidine during the early stages of plaque accumulation and, with time, became insignificant. This study has demonstrated that chlorhexidine was superior to Listerine and Meridol in its ability to maintain low plaque scores and gingival health during this 3-week period of no mechanical oral hygiene. Moreover, it was also shown that Meridol was as effective as Listerine in reducing plaque accumulation and, in contrast to Listerine, possessed a remarkable but transient antibacterial effect in vivo.
在一项双盲研究中，使用实验性牙龈炎模型比较了一种酚类化合物（李施德林）和一种胺/氟化亚锡漱口水（美立多）的抗牙菌斑、抗牙龈炎和抗菌功效，使用安慰剂制剂作为阴性对照，洗必泰溶液作为阳性对照。在专业洗牙后，36名志愿者进行了为期2周的最佳口腔卫生护理。然后，他们在21天内停止所有口腔卫生程序，在此期间，他们每天用4种漱口水之一漱口两次。漱口3周后，洗必泰组的牙菌斑指数仍然最低，而使用李施德林或美立多的受试者的牙菌斑指数明显低于用安慰剂溶液漱口的个体。到那时，除洗必泰组外，所有组的牙龈指数得分均相等，洗必泰组的值仅为其他组的一半。牙菌斑活力得分显示，在实验性牙龈炎的整个过程中，洗必泰在体内具有杀菌作用。相比之下，数据没有显示李施德林在体内有抗菌作用。在牙菌斑积累的早期阶段，美立多杀灭微生物的功效与洗必泰相似，但随着时间的推移，这种功效变得不明显。这项研究表明，在为期3周不进行机械口腔卫生护理的期间，洗必泰在维持低牙菌斑得分和牙龈健康方面优于李施德林和美立多。此外，研究还表明，美立多在减少牙菌斑积累方面与李施德林一样有效，并且与李施德林不同的是，它在体内具有显著但短暂的抗菌作用。
