Alcohol-containing mouthwash and oropharyngeal cancer: a review of the epidemiology

Alcohol-based mouthwash as a risk factor of oral cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Oral and pharynx cancer represent a serious global problem, reaching an incidence of half a million cases annually. The role of tobacco and alcohol have been studied and proven to be one of its risk factors. We also know that mouthwashes contain a variable percentage of alcohol, so there is a reasonable concern about their role in carcinogenesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To answer the PICOS (Population; Intervention; Comparison; Outcomes; Study) question: Do patients (Population) who use alcohol-based mouthwashes (Intervention) compared to those who do not use them (Comparison) have higher acetaldehyde levels in saliva or higher risk of oral cancer development? (Outcomes) Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized and non-randomized clinical trials, case-control studies, and prospective and retrospective cohort studies were included (Study). Two independent authors conducted literature screening through MEDLINE, Scopus and the Cochrane Library, and they also conducted article and data extraction to undertake quality analyses. The main outcome measures were salivary acetaldehyde levels or the risk of oral cancer development. The most relevant data was extracted and the risk of bias from the studies included was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Out of 497 potentially eligible papers, 8 studies were included in the qualitative analysis which include a total of 43,499 subjects: two meta-analyses, a clinical trial, three case-control studies and two cohort studies. One study (n = 3,926) found a relationship between alcohol mouthwash and oral cancer, two studies (n = 25,033) found this relationship when a high frequency of mouthwash was present, three studies (n = 14,482) failed to find this relationship and 2 studies (n = 58) found a temporary increase of acetaldehyde levels in saliva after alcohol mouthwash.

CONCLUSIONS

It cannot be guaranteed that the use of mouthwash represents an independent risk factor for the development of head and neck cancer. However, the risk does increase when it occurs in association with other carcinogenic risk factors.

Effect of herbal mouthrinses on dental plaque formation and gingival inflammation: A systematic review

To evaluate the effect of herbal mouthrinses as an adjuvant to oral hygiene on dental plaque and gingival inflammation in subjects with gingivitis. Searches were conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, LILACS/BIREME, Clinical Trials Registry and grey literature for Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs) published up to April 2018 without language restrictions. From 4,013 paper found, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included. The herbal mouthrinses achieved significant reductions in dental plaque and gingival inflammation compared to placebo rinses. Five herbal products (Camelia sinensis, Azadirachta indica, Anacardium occidentale Linn, Schinus terebinthifolius and Curcuma longa) showed better results than chlorhexidine in dental plaque and gingival inflammation reductions. However, the unclear risk of bias of most included RCTs precludes definitive conclusions. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the design of future RCT in other reduced potential bias that may affect the degree of precision of treatment outcomes in order to evaluate the effect size and clinical relevance of herbal mouthrinses.

Periodontitis: facts, fallacies and the future

This volume of Periodontology 2000 represents the 25th anniversary of the Journal, and uses the occasion to assess important advancements in periodontology over the past quarter-century as well as the hurdles that remain. Periodontitis is defined by pathologic loss of the periodontal ligament and alveolar bone. The disease involves complex dynamic interactions among active herpesviruses, specific bacterial pathogens and destructive immune responses. Periodontal diagnostics is currently based on clinical rather than etiologic criteria, and provides limited therapeutic guidance. Periodontal causative treatment consists of scaling, antiseptic rinses and occasionally systemic antibiotics, and surgical intervention has been de-emphasized, except perhaps for the most advanced types of periodontitis. Plastic surgical therapy includes soft-tissue grafting to cover exposed root surfaces and bone grafting to provide support for implants. Dental implants are used to replace severely diseased or missing teeth, but implant overuse is of concern. The utility of laser treatment for periodontitis remains unresolved. Host modulation and risk-factor modification therapies may benefit select patient groups. Patient self-care is a critical part of periodontal health care, and twice-weekly oral rinsing with 0.10-0.25% sodium hypochlorite constitutes a valuable adjunct to conventional anti-plaque and anti-gingivitis treatments. A link between periodontal herpesviruses and systemic diseases is a strong biological plausibility. In summary, research during the past 25 years has significantly changed our concepts of periodontitis pathobiology and has produced more-effective and less-costly therapeutic options.

Potential hazards due to food additives in oral hygiene products

Food additives used to preserve flavor or to enhance the taste and appearance of foods are also available in oral hygiene products. The aim of this review is to provide information concerning food additives in oral hygiene products and their adverse effects. A great many of food additives in oral hygiene products are potential allergens and they may lead to allergic reactions such as urticaria, contact dermatitis, rhinitis, and angioedema. Dental practitioners, as well as health care providers, must be aware of the possibility of allergic reactions due to food additives in oral hygiene products. Proper dosage levels, delivery vehicles, frequency, potential benefits, and adverse effects of oral health products should be explained completely to the patients. There is a necessity to raise the awareness among dental professionals on this subject and to develop a data gathering system for possible adverse reactions.

Randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of new alcohol-free chlorhexidine mouthrinses after 8 weeks

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of two alcohol-free antimicrobial mouthrinses in reducing plaque and gingivitis compared to an alcohol-containing rinse and toothbrushing alone.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty healthy volunteers were enrolled in the randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomly and equally assigned to four groups: (i) toothbrushing + rinsing (0.06% CHX + 0.025% NaF, alcohol-containing rinse, positive control); (ii) toothbrushing + rinsing (0.06% CHX + 0.025% NaF, alcohol-free experimental rinse); (iii) toothbrushing + rinsing (0.06% CHX + 0.03% CPC + 0.025% NaF, alcohol-free experimental rinse); (iv) toothbrushing alone (negative control). At baseline, Quigley-Hein plaque index (QHI), modified proximal plaque index (MPPI), and papillary bleeding index (PBI) were recorded. All subjects brushed their teeth as usual during the study. Additionally, groups 1-3 rinsed twice daily. Eight weeks after baseline, indices were recorded again. anova with Bonferroni adjustment served for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-five participants were included into final analysis (i: n = 39, 2: n = 39, 3: n = 37, 4: n = 40). Experimental rinses (ii, iii) reduced QHI and MPPI to a higher extent than the negative control (iv), whereas no significant difference to the positive control was found. QHI: (i) 36.6%, (ii) 32.3%, (iii) 36.8%, (iv) 21.6%; MPPI: (i) 11.9%, (ii) 12.2%, (iii) 13.6%, (iv) 3.5%. For PBI, no statistically significant difference was found between groups: (i) 80.2%, (ii) 77.8%, (iii) 76.5% and (iv) 78.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

With respect to QHI and MPPI, toothbrushing in combination with any rinse was more effective than toothbrushing alone. No statistically significant differences were found between the alcohol-free and the alcohol-containing control rinses.

Cytogenetic analysis of oral mucosa cells, induced by chlorhexidine, essential oils in ethanolic solution and triclosan mouthwashes

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate DNA damage and cytokinetic defects, proliferative potential and cell death caused by the frequent use of mouthrinses containing chlorhexidine, triclosan and essential oils in ethanolic solution, compared to a placebo mouthwash.

STUDY DESIGN

This double-blind, prospective, randomized clinical trial included 80 Caucasian patients. Subjects were divided into four groups: Group I used a mouthrinse, Triclosan; Group II used physiological saline; Group III used chlorhexidine; Group IV a mouthrinse with essential oils in ethanolic solution. All subjects used the mouthrinses for two weeks (15 ml, twice a day, rinsing for 30s). Two cell samples per subject were collected, before and after mouthrinse use (on day 0 and day 15). Samples were processed as follows: cell collection from cheeks with a cytobrush; cell centrifuge; slide preparation, fixation and staining; and fluorescent microscope analysis. 2000 exfoliated cells were screened for nuclear abnormalities, particularly the presence of micronuclei by means of cytome assay.

RESULTS

No significant differences between study times (before and after use of mouthwash) were identified for any of the variables studied (p>0.05). Differences between mouthrinse groups were also compared but no significant differences were found (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not observe any genotoxic effect resulting from mouthrinse use.

Periodontal disease and mouthwash use are risk factors for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine associations between oral hygiene, including history of periodontal disease and mouthwash use, and risk of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

METHODS

We measured history of oral hygiene and dental care on 513 HNSCC cases and 567 controls from a population-based study of HNSCC. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

Periodontal disease was associated with a slightly elevated risk of HNSCC (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.16). Using any type of mouthwash at least once per day was associated with increased risk compared to never using mouthwash (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.20). HNSCC was associated with frequent use of non-alcoholic mouthwash compared to using any kind of mouthwash rarely or never (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support an association between periodontal disease and HNSCC. Our data suggest that mouthwash use is associated with HNSCC, but we noted no difference between the effects of alcohol-containing and non-alcoholic mouthwashes.

Low-cost periodontal therapy

Periodontitis is a complex infectious disease that affects low-income individuals disproportionately. Periodontitis is associated with specific bacterial species and herpesviruses, and successful prevention and treatment of the disease is contingent upon effective control of these pathogens. This article presents an efficacious, highly safe, minimally invasive, practical and low-cost periodontal therapy that involves professional and patient-administered mechanical therapy and antimicrobial agents. The major components are scaling for calculus removal, periodontal pocket irrigation with potent antiseptics, and treatment with systemic antibiotics for advanced disease. Povidone-iodine and sodium hypochlorite have all the characteristics for becoming the first-choice antiseptics in the management of periodontal diseases. Both agents show excellent antibacterial and antiviral properties, are readily available throughout the world, have been safely used in periodontal therapy for decades, offer significant benefits for individuals with very limited financial resources, and are well accepted by most dental professionals and patients. Four per cent chlorhexidine applied with a toothbrush to the most posterior part to the tongue dorsum can markedly reduce or eliminate halitosis in most individuals. Systemic antibiotics are used to treat periodontopathic bacteria that are not readily reached by topical therapy, such as pathogens within gingival tissue, within furcation defects, at the base of periodontal pockets, and on the tongue, tonsils and buccal mucosae. Valuable antibiotic therapies are amoxicillin-metronidazole (250 mg of amoxicillin and 250 mg of metronidazole, three times daily for 8 days) for young and middle-aged patients, and ciprofloxacin-metronidazole (500 mg of each, twice daily for 8 days) for elderly patients and for patients in developing countries who frequently harbor enteric rods subgingivally. Scaling to remove dental calculus and the prudent use of inexpensive antimicrobial agents can significantly retard or arrest progressive periodontitis in the great majority of patients.

Cytological changes in the oral mucosa after use of a mouth rinse with alcohol. A prospective double blind control study

AIM

The aim of this preliminary study was to detect cytological changes in the oral mucosa after using a mouth wash with alcohol.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective double-blind, controlled study was performed, for 6 months. Group 1 consisted of 30 subjects who used a mouth rinse with 26.9% of alcohol [Listerine] and Group 2 consisted of 30 subjects who used a mouth rinse with the same ingredients but with no alcohol. We obtained three cytological samples from the oral mucosa. The presence of cytological atypia, binucleation and karyorrhesis, and type of cells were studied. We also used a fluorescent in situ hybridization technique (FISH) in 15 samples in each group, for the micronucleus.

RESULTS

We found no clinical mucosal alteration after using the mouth wash at the end of the study in either group. We observed no cytological differences between the groups at the end of the study (p>0.05). Regarding the study of the micronucleus by FISH, we observed no significant difference between the groups (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed no cytological alteration in patients using a mouth rinse with alcohol, but these findings should be considered preliminary results, to be confirmed in a greater sample of patients.

Evaluation of genotoxicity after application of Listerine(R) on human lymphocytes by micronucleus and single cell gel electrophoresis assays

Listerine (LN) is one of the most commonly used mouth rinses worldwide although very limited information is available concerning its genotoxicity. In another view, the biological safety profile of oral care products is frequently assumed on the basis of simplistic test models. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to investigate the in vitro genotoxic potential of LN using micronucleus and single cell gel electrophoresis tests as genetic endpoints. Different concentrations of LN (0-100% of ml/culture, v/v) were applied to whole human blood cultures (n = 5). The result of the present study showed that there were no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) between the control group and the groups treated with LN alone in both analysed endpoints. In conclusion, our result first demonstrated the absence of genotoxicity of LN on human lymphocytes.

Proposal for the teaching of the chemical control of supragingival biofilm

The mechanical control of supragingival biofilm is accepted as one of the most important measures to treat and prevent dental caries and periodontal diseases. Nevertheless, maintaining dental surfaces biofilm-free is not an easy task. In this regard, chemical agents, mainly in the form of mouthwashes, have been studied to help overcome the difficulties involved in the mechanical control of biofilm. The aim of this paper was to discuss proposals for the teaching of supragingival chemical control (SCC) in order to improve dentists' knowledge regarding this clinical issue. Firstly, the literature regarding the efficacy of antiseptics is presented, clearly showing that chemical agents are clinically effective in the reduction of biofilm and gingival inflammation when used as adjuvant agents to mechanical control. Thus, it is suggested that the content related to SCC be included in the curricular grid of dental schools. Secondly, some essential topics are recommended to be included in the teaching of SCC as follows: skills and competencies expected of a graduate dentist regarding SCC; how to include this content in the curricular grid; teaching-learning tools and techniques to be employed; and program content.

Coffee consumption and risk of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of case-control studies

A meta-analysis of case-control studies on coffee consumption and colorectal cancer risk was conducted. Twenty-four eligible studies published before May 2010 were identified, including a total of 14,846 cases of colorectal, colon or rectal cancer. Compared to non/occasional drinkers, the odds ratios (OR) for drinkers were 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.95) for colorectal, 0.93 (95% CI 0.81-1.07) for colon and 0.98 (95% CI 0.85-1.13) for rectal cancer, with significant heterogeneity among studies; the corresponding ORs for the increment of 1 cup/day were 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.98), 0.95 (95% CI 0.92-0.98), and 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.99). For the highest coffee drinkers, the ORs were 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-0.81) for colorectal cancer, 0.75 (95% CI 0.64-0.88) for colon cancer and 0.87 (95% CI 0.75-1.00) for rectal cancer, when compared to non/low drinkers. The results of this meta-analysis of case-control studies suggest a moderate favorable effect of coffee consumption on colorectal cancer risk. The reduced risk was consistent across study design (hospital vs. population based), geographic area, and various confounding factors considered. It may reflect a real protection but also partly or largely be due to reverse causation, i.e. decreased coffee consumption among cases following the onset of bowel symptoms.

Reviewed evidence about the safety of the daily use of alcohol-based mouthrinses

Current scientific knowledge provides clear evidence that alcohol-based mouthwashes can be beneficial in a daily oral health routine, including dental hygiene and plaque control. Several issues are worth discussing, in spite of the wealth of supporting evidence. Despite some undesirable effects to some people, like burning sensation, and some contraindications, like the use by infants, alcohol addicts and patients with mucosal injuries, there is no reason to avoid the use of alcohol-containing mouthwashes as long as they are used following proper guidance by dental professionals and the manufacturers' instructions. The alleged correlation between oral cancer and alcohol-based mouthrinses presents so little, weak, inconsistent and even contradictory evidence in the literature that any kind of risk warning to patients would be uncalled for. Antimicrobial mouthrinses are safe and effective in reducing plaque and gingivitis, and should be part of a comprehensive oral health care regimen that includes brushing, flossing and rinsing to prevent or minimize periodontal disease.

Salivary acetaldehyde increase due to alcohol-containing mouthwash use: a risk factor for oral cancer

Increasing evidence suggests that acetaldehyde, the first and genotoxic metabolite of ethanol, mediates the carcinogenicity of alcoholic beverages. Ethanol is also contained in a number of ready-to-use mouthwashes typically between 5 and 27% vol. An increased risk of oral cancer has been discussed for users of such mouthwashes; however, epidemiological evidence had remained inconclusive. This study is the first to investigate acetaldehyde levels in saliva after use of alcohol-containing mouthwashes. Ready-to-use mouthwashes and mouthrinses (n = 13) were rinsed in the mouth by healthy, nonsmoking volunteers (n = 4) as intended by the manufacturers (20 ml for 30 sec). Saliva was collected at 0.5, 2, 5 and 10 min after mouthwash use and analyzed using headspace gas chromatography. The acetaldehyde content in the saliva was 41 +/- 15 microM, range 9-85 microM (0.5 min), 52 +/- 14 microM, range 11-105 microM (2 min), 32 +/- 7 microM, range 9-67 microM (5 min) and 15 +/- 7 microM, range 0-37 microM (10 min). The contents were significantly above endogenous levels and corresponding to concentrations normally found after alcoholic beverage consumption. A twice-daily use of alcohol-containing mouthwashes leads to a systemic acetaldehyde exposure of 0.26 microg/kg bodyweight/day on average, which corresponds to a lifetime cancer risk of 3E-6. The margin of exposure was calculated to be 217,604, which would be seen as a low public health concern. However, the local acetaldehyde contents in the saliva are reaching concentrations associated with DNA adduct formation and sister chromatid exchange in vitro, so that concerns for local carcinogenic effects in the oral cavity remain.

Safety evaluation of topical applications of ethanol on the skin and inside the oral cavity

Ethanol is widely used in all kinds of products with direct exposure to the human skin (e.g. medicinal products like hand disinfectants in occupational settings, cosmetics like hairsprays or mouthwashes, pharmaceutical preparations, and many household products). Contradictory evidence about the safety of such topical applications of the alcohol can be found in the scientific literature, yet an up-to-date risk assessment of ethanol application on the skin and inside the oral cavity is currently lacking.The first and foremost concerns of topical ethanol applications for public health are its carcinogenic effects, as there is unambiguous evidence for the carcinogenicity of ethanol orally consumed in the form of alcoholic beverages. So far there is a lack of evidence to associate topical ethanol use with an increased risk of skin cancer. Limited and conflicting epidemiological evidence is available on the link between the use of ethanol in the oral cavity in the form of mouthwashes or mouthrinses and oral cancer. Some studies pointed to an increased risk of oral cancer due to locally produced acetaldehyde, operating via a similar mechanism to that found after alcoholic beverage ingestion.In addition, topically applied ethanol acts as a skin penetration enhancer and may facilitate the transdermal absorption of xenobiotics (e.g. carcinogenic contaminants in cosmetic formulations). Ethanol use is associated with skin irritation or contact dermatitis, especially in humans with an aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) deficiency.After regular application of ethanol on the skin (e.g. in the form of hand disinfectants) relatively low but measurable blood concentrations of ethanol and its metabolite acetaldehyde may occur, which are, however, below acute toxic levels. Only in children, especially through lacerated skin, can percutaneous toxicity occur.As there might be industry bias in many studies about the safety of topical ethanol applications, as well as a general lack of scientific research on the long-term effects, there is a requirement for independent studies on this topic. The research focus should be set on the chronic toxic effects of ethanol and acetaldehyde at the point of impact, with special regard to children and individuals with genetic deficiencies in ethanol metabolism.

The long-term effect of a mouthrinse containing essential oils on dental plaque and gingivitis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to review the literature on the effects of a mouthrinse containing essential oils (EO) on plaque and parameters of gingival inflammation.

METHODS

The MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to and including December 2006 to identify appropriate studies. The primary outcome measure was gingivitis. Secondary parameters were plaque and, when reported, staining.

RESULTS

Independent screening of titles and abstracts of 566 papers resulted in 11 publications that met the criteria of eligibility. In all studies, EO was used as an adjunct to regular daily toothbrushing. A statistically significant reduction in overall gingivitis was noted compared to the control (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.46 to -0.19, P <0.00001; test for heterogeneity: P <0.00001, I(2) = 96.7%). For interproximal sites the use of the test mouthrinse resulted in significantly more gingivitis reduction compared to control mouthrinse (WMD: -0.29, 95% CI: -0.48 to -0.11, P = 0.002; test for heterogeneity: P <0.00001, I(2) = 95.18%), whereas no differences were observed compared to dental floss. With respect to plaque scores, EO produced significant overall reductions in plaque (WMD: -0.83, 95% CI: -1.13 to -0.53, P <0.00001; test for heterogeneity: P <0.00001, I(2) = 96.1%). Separate analysis for interproximal areas revealed that EO resulted in more pronounced plaque drops compared to the control mouthrinse (WMD: -1.02, 95% CI: -1.44 to -0.60, P <0.00001; test for heterogeneity: P <0.00001, I(2) = 96.1%) or the use of floss (WMD: -0.75, 95% CI: -1.15 to -0.363, P <0.0002; test for heterogeneity: P <0.0002, I(2) = 93.0%). Most studies agreed that EO did not produce more staining than the control products.

CONCLUSION

When used as an adjunct to unsupervised oral hygiene, EO provides an additional benefit with regard to plaque and gingivitis reduction as compared to a placebo or control.

Cannabis; adverse effects from an oromucosal spray

BACKGROUND

An oromucosal spray has been developed from the major components of marijuana (cannabis), including tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), in alcohol with a peppermint flavouring, designed to be administered as a spray under the tongue or on the buccal mucosa to relieve pain in multiple sclerosis. Although the available evidence indicates its efficacy in this respect, some patients develop oral burning sensation, stinging or white lesions, probably burns.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the oral side-effects of oromucosal cannabis spray in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients.

DESIGN

A small open observational study.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A series of nine patients with MS who had been using a marijuana oromucosal spray for at least four weeks, were asked to attend for oral examination. Patients were asked whether they had ever experienced symptoms (dryness; bad taste; stinging) associated with use of the spray. A standard oral examination was carried out using a dental light, and the presence of any mucosal lesions recorded. Where mucosal lesions were present, patients were advised to discontinue the spray and re-attend after four weeks for re-examination. For ethical reasons, biopsies were not undertaken at the first visit.

RESULTS

Of nine patients invited to participate, eight attended. All admitted to a stinging sensation on using the oromucosal cannabis spray, and four had visible oral mucosal white lesions in the floor of the mouth.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the white lesions observed were almost certainly burns, resolving or improving on discontinuation of use of the medication, the high alcohol concentration of the oromucosal cannabis spray raises concern in relation to chronic oral use.

Mouthrinses containing alcohol and oral cancer: revision of epidemiological studies

The strong association between alcohol usage and the development of oral cancer (OC) has been reported in numerous papers. As some mouthrinses contain significant amounts of ethanol, a possible relationship to this pathology has been considered. The purpose of the present paper is to analyze several epidemiological studies which evaluated the association between commercial mouthrinses and the etiology of OC. Although some authors report an association, most of the studies are unclear and sometimes contradictory. The controversial aspects regarding the role of alcohol in OC may also make difficult to find a clear relationship between the use of mouthrinses containing alcohol and OC.