This study documents that the three tested dentifrices significantly reduced DH after 3-day treatment, supporting their use in clinical practice. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first report documenting the rapid relief from DH of a zinc-carbonate hydroxyapatite dentifrice.
Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the anti-inflammatory effect and the incidence of adverse effects of an all-natural polyherbal mouthwash in patients with periodontitis, after 3 months of use. These aims were accomplished by using full mouth bleeding score (FMBS), full mouth plaque score (FMPS), probing depth (PD) clinical attachment level (CAL) and a questionnaire recording any adverse events. Methods: The present randomized controlled clinical study considered 40 patients with moderate or severe periodontitis, randomized in two groups: a test group (TG) and a control group (CG). TG was instructed to use a polyherbal mouthwash composed of Propolis resin extract, Plantago lanceolata, Salvia officinalis leaves extract, and 1.75% of essential oils and the CG was given a placebo mouthwash. Both groups were instructed to rinse for 2 min, twice daily after their routine oral home care with the different mouthwashes. Clinical measurements of FMBS, FMPS, PD and CAL were recorded at baseline (T0) and after 3 months (T1). The incidence of adverse outcomes was recorded at every follow-up. Mann–Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used for the statistical analysis ( p < 0.05). Results: The final study sample consisted of 34 healthy individuals, 17 individuals in each of the two groups. TG and CG showed a statistically significant reduction in FMBS ( p = 0.001 TG; p = 0.002 CG), FMPS ( p = 0.001 TG; p = 0.003 CG), PD ( p = 0.001 TG; p = 0.011 CG) and CAL ( p < 0.001 TG; p = 0.020 CG) values from baseline to 3 months. The TG showed a statistically significant decrease in FMBS and FMPS compared with the CG. No adverse events or side effects were reported or observed in both groups. Conclusion: The use of polyherbal mouthwash in patients with moderate or severe periodontitis has proved safe and effective in reducing bleeding score and plaque accumulation, after 3 months, compared with placebo, although no difference between the two groups were reported on PD and CAL (both improving at T1).
Dental remineralization represents the process of depositing calcium and phosphate ions into crystal voids in demineralized enamel, producing net mineral gain and preventing early enamel lesions progression. The aim of the present study was to qualitatively and quantitatively compare the remineralizing effectiveness of four commercially available agents on enamel artificial lesions using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) combined with Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) techniques. Thirty-six extracted third molars were collected and randomly assigned to six groups (n = 6), five of which were suspended in demineralizing solution for 72 h to create enamel artificial lesions, and one serving as control: G1, treated with a mousse of casein phosphopeptide and amorphous calcium–phosphate (CPP-ACP); G2, treated with a gel containing nano-hydroxyapatite; G3, treated with a 5% SF varnish; G4, treated with a toothpaste containing ACP functionalized with fluoride and carbonate-coated with citrate; G5, not-treated artificial enamel lesions; G6, not demineralized and not treated sound enamel. G1–G4 were subjected to pH cycling over a period of seven days. Analyses of the specimens’ enamel surfaces morphology were performed by SEM and EDS. Data were statistically analyzed for multiple group comparison by one-way ANOVA/Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). The results show that the Ca/P ratio of the G5 (2.00 ± 0.07) was statistically different (p < 0.05) from G1 (1.73 ± 0.05), G2 (1.76 ± 0.01), G3 (1.88 ± 0.06) and G6 (1.74 ± 0.04), while there were no differences (p > 0.05) between G1, G2 and G6 and between G4 (2.01 ± 0.06) and G5. We concluded that G1 and G2 showed better surface remineralization than G3 and G4, after 7 days of treatment.
Background: Many desensitizing toothpastes exist commercially; however, few clinical trials have investigated their anti-inflammatory effects. This study aimed to evaluate the anti-inflammatory effect and patient appreciation of two toothpastes containing desensitizing agents: (1) a zinc-carbonate-hydroxyapatite nanoparticle (CHA) and (2) a calcium sodium phosphosilicate bioactive glass (CSPS). Methods: CHA and CSPS were compared with an anti-inflammatory and antibacterial herbal based toothpaste (HB). The aims were accomplished by comparing the following outcomes: (1) the reduction in plaque and bleeding score (Full Mouth Plaque Score (FMPS) and Full Mouth Bleeding Score (FMBS), respectively); (2) the antibacterial activity (AbA) of the toothpaste by saliva samples; (3) the patient appreciation score (Visual Analogue Scale; VAS). Clinical parameters were assessed at baseline and 14 days post-treatment. Results: The final sample consisted of 25 subjects, aged between 20 and 58 years. Although no differences in FMPS were reported (p > 0.05), both desensitizing toothpastes showed an improvement in FMBS. CSPS and HB recorded more AbA compared to CHA (p < 0.05). Moreover, HB resulted in a higher VAS score than both desensitizing toothpastes (p < 0.05). Conclusion: In conclusion, only CSPS displayed a similar anti-inflammatory effect compared to HB. Despite the low VAS score, CSPS could be considered as a valid and effective toothpaste in subjects with both dentin hypersensitivity and inflamed gums, highlighting its utility in clinical practice.
There is no difference between chlorhexidine-soaked gauze and CM regarding plaque control. In addition, gauze soaked with chlorhexidine was significantly more effective in reducing the bleeding index score and was appreciated by the patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.