No abstract

No abstract

Background Antimicrobial agents are considered valuable adjuncts to mechanical methods of plaque control. However, their long-term use can be limited because of side effects. Therefore, using physiological substances is promising due to no risk of development, for example, of microbial resistances, allergies or DNA damaging. The lactoperoxidase-thiocyanate-hydrogen peroxide system (LPO-system) is a highly effective antimicrobial system. This study aimed to evaluate in a randomized study with a four-replicate cross-over design the effectiveness of two oral hygiene lozenges containing LPO-system in oral hygiene. Results After using the mouth rinse as positive control (A) and allocated test lozenges (B) (0.083% H2O2) & (C) (0.04% H2O2) for 4 days instead of the normal oral hygiene procedures (tooth brushing etc.), Listerine rinse (A) was statistically significantly more effective than the LPO-system-lozenge with 0.083% H2O2, the LPO-system-lozenge with 0.04% H2O2, and the placebo lozenge (D) in inhibiting plaque. Lozenges B and C were statistically significantly more effective than the placebo lozenge, but no statistically significant differences could be observed between them. The LPO-system-lozenge (B) reduced statistically significantly more S. mutans than the LPO-system-lozenge with (C) and the placebo lozenge (D). The LPO-system-lozenge (C) reduced statistically significantly more Lactobacilli than Listerine (A), the LPO-system-lozenge (B) and the placebo lozenge (D). There were no statistically significant differences in the total CFUs between Listerine rinse, the LPO-system-lozenge with 0.083% H2O2 (B), the LPO-system-lozenge with 0.04% H2O2 (C), and the placebo lozenge (D). On day 5 there were no differences of the OSCN−-values between all A, B, C, and D. However, the SCN−-values increased over the days in both LPO-system-lozenges (B/C). The statistically significant differences between B/C and A/D on day 5 were as followed: A to B p = 0.0268; A to C p = 0.0035; B to D p = 0.0051; C to D p = 0.0007. Only in the group of Listerine (A) increased the NO3−/NO2−-quotient over the test time, which indicates a reduction of nitrate-reducing bacteria. On Day 5 the statistically significant difference between A and B was p = 0.0123. Conclusions The results indicate that lozenges containing a complete LPO-system, inhibiting plaque regrowth and reducing cariogenic bacteria, may be used in the daily oral hygiene.

Antiseptics are being used for prevention of infections in acute wounds and for treatment of infections in acute and chronic wounds. However, some antiseptics' high tissue toxicity might delay the healing process. The aim of this study was to investigate the tissue toxicity of preferentially used wound antiseptics and the influence of antiphlogistic additives via the hen's egg test on the chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM). The HET-CAM is a semi-in-vivo method testing the tissue tolerability of wound antiseptics by evaluating the blood vessel reaction of the chorioallantoic membrane in terms of hemorrhage, vessel lysis, and coagulation. For each test day, selected test substances were applied on the membranes of two to three eggs according to the test protocol. The overall irritation was then evaluated by referring to a calculated score. Normal distribution of the resulting scores was confirmed by D'Agostino-Pearson omnibus K2 test. Significant differences between the antiseptics were calculated by Tukey's multiple comparisons test. Severe CAM reactions were observed after short-term application of octenidine based wound gel (0.05%) and chlorhexidine digluconate (0.5% solution), moderate reactions for octenidine (0.05%) in aqueous solution combined with dexpanthenol (1.34%) and allantoin (0.2%) or for hydrogen peroxide (1.5% and 0.5%) in aqueous solution, slight reactions were observed for hydrogen peroxide (1.5%) in aqueous solution in combination with sodium thiocyanate (0.698%) and for the combination of NaOCl/ HOCl (each 0.004%). Polyhexanide (0.04%) in Ringer solution and polyhexanide (0.05%) in Lipofundin, the hemoglobin spray (10%), dexpanthenol, and allantoin showed no irritation. The HET-CAM qualifies as a primary screening test for tissue tolerance of wound antiseptics. Regarding local tolerability, polyhexanide and hypochlorite are superior to other antiseptics.

The aim of this study was to compare different wound-rinsing solutions to determine differences in the efficiency and to evaluate three different in vitro models for wound cleansing. Different wound-rinsing solutions (physiological saline solution, ringer lactate solution for wound irrigation, water and a solution containing polihexanide and the surfactant undecylenamidopropyl-betain) were applied on standardised test models (one-and three-chamber model, flow-cell method and a biofilm model), each challenged with three different standardised wound test soils. In the one-chamber model saline showed a better effect on decontaminating proteins than the ringer lactate solution. In the flow-cell method, water performed better than physiological saline solution, whereas ringer lactate solution demonstrated the lowest cleansing effect. No obvious superiority between the two electrolyte-containing solutions was detectable in the biofilm model. Unfortunately, it was not possible to assess the protein decontamination qualities of the surfactant-containing solution because of the interference with the protein measurement. The flow-cell method was able to detect differences between different rinse solutions because it works at constant flow mechanics, imitating a wound-rinsing procedure. The three-chamber and the less-pronounced modified one-chamber method as well as the biofilm model had generated inhomogeneous results.