Evaluation of the effects of 0.05% sodium hypochlorite and 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate twice daily rinse on periodontal parameters and gingival crevicular fluid HSV1 and CMV levels in patients with chronic periodontitis: a multicentric study

Effect of a sodium hypochlorite mouthwash on plaque and clinical parameters of periodontal disease‐a systematic review

“…The potential risk of bias was estimated on the basis of methodological quality aspects of the included papers using the checklist presented in Appendix . Based on the summary of the proposed criteria, the estimated risk of bias was low for comparison II, 28 moderate for comparisons III 27 and V, 39,40 and high for comparisons I, 26 IV 25 and VI 41 …”

“…Galvan et al (2014) 39 aimed to evaluate the effect of NaOCl‐MW on plaque and gingivitis in patients with periodontitis, and Gonzales et al (2015) 40 published a sub‐analysis of the effect of NaOCl‐MW on bleeding on probing scores in relation to pocket depth measurements. The efficacy of NaOCl‐MW was evaluated in three comparisons (I, 26 II 28 and V 39 , 40 ) with a negative control and three comparisons (III, 27 IV 25 and VI 41 ) with a positive control.…”

“…Five of the selected comparisons were parallel‐design RCTs (I, 26 II, 28 III, 27 V 39 , 40 and VI 41 ), and one comparison was a parallel‐design CCT (IV 25 ). Shanker et al (III 27 ) mention that their study had a case‐control design, but they had randomly distributed the patients into test and control groups; consequently, the trial was assumed to be an RCT.…”

“…However, the comparison also differed with respect to the periodontal condition of the participants and study design, which explains the positive effect. De Nardo et al (I 26 ) and Singh et al (VI 41 ) used the lowest concentration (0.05%) among all selected studies and still showed significant results favouring NaOCl. However, De Nardo et al (I 26 ) used an experimental gingivitis model, 52 in which NaOCl‐MW was used as a substitute for regular oral hygiene measures.…”

Analysis of the effects of prepared porcelain veneers and unprepared porcelain veneers on gingival crevicular flora based on high‑throughput sequencing

“…Due to its characteristics including minimally invasive and less enamel damage, the stability of restoration has increased, which greatly improves the clinical success rate (18). Porcelain materials have great biocompatibility, and concurrently, they can maintain favorable teeth aesthetics and patient satisfaction (19). Numerous studies, with evaluation time-points ranging from 5 to 20 years, support that porcelain veneer therapy exhibits favorable clinical performance (20)(21)(22)(23)(24).…”