两种天然漱口水与洗必泰对高龋风险患者预防龋齿和抗菌作用的随机临床试验。

Caries Preventive and Antibacterial Effects of Two Natural Mouthwashes vs Chlorhexidine in High Caries-risk Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

机构信息

Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt, Phone: +20 02 23634965, e-mail:

Dentistry Department, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

出版信息

J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020 Dec 1;21(12):1316-1324.

PMID:33893252

Abstract

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the caries preventive and antibacterial effects of Gum Arabic and Licorice mouthwashes vs chlorhexidine in high caries-risk patients. The prevalence of oral side effects from using the mouthwashes was also assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Total 63 participants categorized as high caries-risk according to the CAMBRA caries-risk model were recruited. They were randomly allocated to three groups ( = 21) according to the mouthwash used: G1 (Gum Arabic), G2 (Licorice), and G3 (Chlorhexidine). Baseline DMF scores and saliva samples were obtained. DMF scores, salivary (SM) and (LA) counts, and any reported oral side effects were recorded after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. The obtained results were subjected to the statistical analysis and the significance level was set at ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

Regarding DMF scores, no statistically significant difference was found between the three groups at baseline, after 3, 6, and 9 months. After 12 months, a statistically significant difference was found between G3 and each of G1 and G2 where G3 showed significantly higher DMF scores ( < 0.001). No statistically significant difference was found between G1 and G2. Regarding antibacterial activity, after 6 months, all mouthwashes showed statistically significant antibacterial effect against SM and LA with no statistically significant difference between them ( < 0.001). After 9 and 12 months, G1 and G2 showed a statistically significant reduction in SM and LA counts ( < 0.001). However, G3 showed a statistically significant increase in SM and LA counts indicating bacterial resistance ( < 0.001). No oral side effects were reported in G1 and G2. On the other hand, several oral side effects were reported in G3.

CONCLUSION

Gum Arabic and Licorice mouthwashes show promising caries preventive and antibacterial effects with no oral side effects reported.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Natural mouthwashes can serve as substitutes to chemical agents as chlorhexidine, providing effective caries control and safe long-term use.

摘要

目的和目标

评估树胶阿拉伯和甘草漱口液与洗必泰相比在高龋风险患者中的防龋和抗菌效果。还评估了使用这些漱口水的口腔副作用的发生率。

材料和方法

根据 CAMBRA 龋病风险模型，共招募了 63 名被归类为高龋风险的参与者。他们根据使用的漱口水被随机分为三组（n = 21）：G1（树胶阿拉伯）、G2（甘草）和 G3（洗必泰）。基线 DMF 评分和唾液样本被获得。DMF 评分、唾液（SM）和龈沟液（LA）计数，以及任何报告的口腔副作用，在 3、6、9 和 12 个月后被记录。获得的结果进行了统计学分析，显著性水平设置为≤0.05。

结果

在基线、3、6 和 9 个月时，三组之间的 DMF 评分无统计学差异。在 12 个月时，G3 与 G1 和 G2 之间存在统计学差异，G3 显示出显著更高的 DMF 评分（<0.001）。G1 和 G2 之间无统计学差异。关于抗菌活性，在 6 个月时，所有漱口水对 SM 和 LA 均表现出统计学显著的抗菌作用，彼此之间无统计学差异（<0.001）。在 9 和 12 个月时，G1 和 G2 显示出 SM 和 LA 计数的统计学显著降低（<0.001）。然而，G3 显示出 SM 和 LA 计数的统计学显著增加，表明细菌耐药性（<0.001）。G1 和 G2 未报告口腔副作用。另一方面，G3 报告了几种口腔副作用。