Effects of Topical Oral Antiseptic Rinses on Bacterial Counts of Saliva in Healthy Human Subjects

Abstract

Wound infections remain a significant source of morbidity in patients undergoing major head and neck operations that invade the aerodigestive tract. Infection rates have been significantly reduced by the administration of perioperative intravenous antibiotics; however, the incidence of infection remains unacceptably high. This study was undertaken to help identify an oral antiseptic that could significantly reduce the bacterial colony count of human saliva. A randomized, prospective clinical trial was conducted to analyze and compare the effects of Listerine antiseptic and Peridex oral rinse on the aerobic and anaerobic bacterial counts in healthy human subjects. Thirty healthy adult volunteers between the ages of 18 and 61 participated in the study. The patients were randomized to receive normal saline solution, Listerine antiseptic, or Peridex oral rinse. Aerobic and anaerobic bacterial colony counts of saliva were measured before treatment and at 1 and 4 hours after treatment. Both Listerine antiseptic and Peridex oral rinse significantly reduced bacterial counts at 1 hour after treatment in our volunteers. At 4 hours after treatment, Peridex oral rinse showed a further reduction in the bacterial colony count whereas Listerine antiseptic showed no difference compared with normal saline solution. At 4 hours after treatment, Peridex oral rinse reduced the total bacterial colony count by 85%.

Mouthwash Effects on LGG-Integrated Experimental Oral Biofilms

“…However, the specific retake timing needs further consideration with respect to the substantivity of mouthwashes in the oral cavity. Research has demonstrated [54][55][56] that 0.2% CHX has the highest substantivity values when compared with the values of other commercial mouthwashes. A period of 3-12 h is required for 0.2% CHX to be washed out of the mouth [9,57].…”

Substantivity of a single chlorhexidine mouthwash on salivary flora: Influence of intrinsic and extrinsic factors

“…[1][2][3][4] Apart from its antiplaque and antigingivitis activity, CHX is therefore also particularly effective for the prevention of infectious complications of oral origin. [5][6][7] However, up to now, we have not found any protocol for the administration of CHX which specifies the most effective dose in those clinical situations in which strong antibacterial activity is required; this is probably due to the absence of scientific evidence based on microbiological and clinical studies.…”

“…15,16 In the majority of published series, measurement of the CHX antimicrobial activity in saliva has been performed using j o u r n a l o f d e n t i s t r y 3 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 5 4 1 -5 4 6 a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: plate culture microbiological techniques. [1][2][3][4] However, the reliability of these techniques is questionable, and fluorescence methods using specific fluorochromes to identify viable and non-viable bacteria have been proposed as alternatives. 17,18 In a recent study, we have demonstrated that epifluorescence microscopy using the SYTO 9/propidium iodide dual stain (LIVE/DEAD 1 BacLight TM ) was an effective method for quantifying the antibacterial activity of CHX on salivary flora in real time.…”

Periodontal disease and respiratory disorders

“…Chlorhexidine appears to be a reasonable choice for maintaining good oral hygiene to reduce plaque and salivary levels of bacteria by up to 85% [23]. Transfer of group B Streptococcus from mother -infant during parturism is reduced due to the usage of chlorhexidine gluconate [24].…”