The use of chlorhexidine in the management of gingivitis in children

Prevalence of temporomandibular disorders in juvenile idiopathic arthritis evaluated with diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a very common systemic inflammatory rheumatic disorder affecting the musculoskeletal system in children below 16 years of age. Joint inflammation and tissue destruction is the prime characteristic of the disease. Along with the systemic involvement in the long joints, several studies are mentioning the increased association of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) in JIA. This current systematic review intends to find the prevalence rate of TMD in JIA-affected individuals as compared to healthy controls.

METHODS

We have searched in PubMed, Scopus and Ovid SP for articles published between the timeframe 1 January 1990 and 1 June 2023. All the searched articles were subjected to the Population, Exposure, Comparison, and Outcome model (PECO) based on which inclusion or exclusion is carried out. Participants (P) are children below 18 years of age, Exposure (E) is children or adolescents with a diagnosis of JIA, Comparator is age and gender-matched healthy controls who has no JIA or any systemic disorder, Outcome (O) is the prevalence of TMD. Only the studies that evaluated TMD using diagnostic criteria for evaluation of TMD (DC/TMD) were included in the analysis. We have set the exclusion to the following reasons- diagnostic sensitivity studies, case reports, and systematic reviews. The software Review Manager Version 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration) was used to perform the pooled analysis. We measured the risk ratio (RR) between the two groups (JIA and no JIA) for the outcome TMD.

RESULTS

The pooled total included subjects were 366 in this review with an established diagnosis of JIA as evaluated by DC/TMD. The overall effect of the pooled data suggests that there is a significant difference in the TMD prevalence in the JIA group when compared to the control, results suggest that TMD is more prevalent in the JIA group RR 3.86; 95% CI [2.59, 5.76].

CONCLUSION

Overall, based on the data we can suggest a positive relationship between JIA and TMD, hence presence of JIA can be a risk factor for the development of TMD. The sensitivity of DC/TMD is low when compared to magnetic resonance imaging.

Characterization of Cocoa Bean Husk Extract Particles and its Comparison as a Mouthrinse with Different Vehicles in Children aged 7-12 Years

Aim

Assessing the efficacy of cocoa bean husk extract (CBHE) particles with different vehicles as a mouthrinse in children aged 7-12 years in comparison to chlorhexidine (CHX) and sodium fluoride (NaF) mouthrinse.

Materials and methods

A total of 80 children aged 7-12 years residing at a residential school/orphanage in Bengaluru city were selected and randomly allocated into five groups-group I: 0.1% CBHE with distilled water (DW); group II: 0.1% CBHE with Ringer's lactate (RL); group III: 0.12% CHX; group IV: 0.1% CBHE with normal saline (NS); and group V: 0.05% NaF. A Simplified Oral Hygiene Index (OHI-S) was recorded, salivary pH was assessed, and unstimulated saliva samples were collected at baseline (BL) after 30 minutes of rinsing on day 7 and day 14. These saliva samples were subjected to microbiological analysis, and all the data from five groups at four different time intervals was tabulated and statistically evaluated.

Results

Nearly 0.1% CBHE with NS as vehicle showed maximum antibacterial properties among all the groups at all time intervals. The addition of RL to CBHE provided better anti-plaque efficacy than 0.1% CBHE with DW and 0.12% CHX mouthwash. All three combinations of 0.1% CBHE and 0.12% CHX mouthwash proved to be better anti-plaque agents than 0.05% NaF. Improving the preparation of CBHE mouthwash by using NS, RL, and with the addition of saccharin sodium also improved the patient's compliance.

Conclusion

Thus, preparing chocolate/CBHE mouthwash with NS or RL instead of plain DW increased the salivary pH, anti-plaque efficacy, and antibacterial property by reducing Streptococcus mutans growth.

Clinical significance

Cocoa bean husk extract (CBHE) mouthwash is a better anticariogenic and nonalcoholic mouthwash compared to CHX and NaF, which can be safely used in children as a routine oral rinse and also for those with gingivitis and high-risk of caries.

How to cite this article

Kibriya S, Srinivasan I, Setty JV, et al. Characterization of Cocoa Bean Husk Extract Particles and its Comparison as a Mouthrinse with Different Vehicles in Children aged 7-12 Years. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(1):54-59.

Chlorhexidine mouthrinse as an adjunctive treatment for gingival health

BACKGROUND

Dental plaque associated gingivitis is a reversible inflammatory condition caused by accumulation and persistence of microbial biofilms (dental plaque) on the teeth. It is characterised by redness and swelling of the gingivae (gums) and a tendency for the gingivae to bleed easily. In susceptible individuals, gingivitis may lead to periodontitis and loss of the soft tissue and bony support for the tooth. It is thought that chlorhexidine mouthrinse may reduce the build-up of plaque thereby reducing gingivitis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of chlorhexidine mouthrinse used as an adjunct to mechanical oral hygiene procedures for the control of gingivitis and plaque compared to mechanical oral hygiene procedures alone or mechanical oral hygiene procedures plus placebo/control mouthrinse. Mechanical oral hygiene procedures were toothbrushing with/without the use of dental floss or interdental cleaning aids and could include professional tooth cleaning/periodontal treatment.To determine whether the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse is influenced by chlorhexidine concentration, or frequency of rinsing (once/day versus twice/day).To report and describe any adverse effects associated with chlorhexidine mouthrinse use from included trials.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 28 September 2016); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 8) in the Cochrane Library (searched 28 September 2016); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 28 September 2016); Embase Ovid (1980 to 28 September 2016); and CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to 28 September 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of chlorhexidine mouthrinse used as an adjunct to mechanical oral hygiene procedures for at least 4 weeks on gingivitis in children and adults. Mechanical oral hygiene procedures were toothbrushing with/without use of dental floss or interdental cleaning aids and could include professional tooth cleaning/periodontal treatment. We included trials where participants had gingivitis or periodontitis, where participants were healthy and where some or all participants had medical conditions or special care needs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We attempted to contact study authors for missing data or clarification where feasible. For continuous outcomes, we used means and standard deviations to obtain the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We combined MDs where studies used the same scale and standardised mean differences (SMDs) where studies used different scales. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs. Due to anticipated heterogeneity we used random-effects models for all meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 51 studies that analysed a total of 5345 participants. One study was assessed as being at unclear risk of bias, with the remaining 50 being at high risk of bias, however, this did not affect the quality assessments for gingivitis and plaque as we believe that further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Gingivitis After 4 to 6 weeks of use, chlorhexidine mouthrinse reduced gingivitis (Gingival Index (GI) 0 to 3 scale) by 0.21 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.31) compared to placebo, control or no mouthrinse (10 trials, 805 participants with mild gingival inflammation (mean score 1 on the GI scale) analysed, high-quality evidence). A similar effect size was found for reducing gingivitis at 6 months. There were insufficient data to determine the reduction in gingivitis associated with chlorhexidine mouthrinse use in individuals with mean GI scores of 1.1 to 3 (moderate or severe levels of gingival inflammation). Plaque Plaque was measured by different indices and the SMD at 4 to 6 weeks was 1.45 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.90) standard deviations lower in the chlorhexidine group (12 trials, 950 participants analysed, high-quality evidence), indicating a large reduction in plaque. A similar large reduction was found for chlorhexidine mouthrinse use at 6 months. Extrinsic tooth staining There was a large increase in extrinsic tooth staining in participants using chlorhexidine mouthrinse at 4 to 6 weeks. The SMD was 1.07 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.34) standard deviations higher (eight trials, 415 participants analysed, moderate-quality evidence) in the chlorhexidine mouthrinse group. There was also a large increase in extrinsic tooth staining in participants using chlorhexidine mouthrinse at 7 to 12 weeks and 6 months. Calculus Results for the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on calculus formation were inconclusive. Effect of concentration and frequency of rinsing There were insufficient data to determine whether there was a difference in effect for either chlorhexidine concentration or frequency of rinsing. Other adverse effects The adverse effects most commonly reported in the included studies were taste disturbance/alteration (reported in 11 studies), effects on the oral mucosa including soreness, irritation, mild desquamation and mucosal ulceration/erosions (reported in 13 studies) and a general burning sensation or a burning tongue or both (reported in nine studies).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence from studies that reported the Löe and Silness Gingival Index of a reduction in gingivitis in individuals with mild gingival inflammation on average (mean score of 1 on the 0 to 3 GI scale) that was not considered to be clinically relevant. There is high-quality evidence of a large reduction in dental plaque with chlorhexidine mouthrinse used as an adjunct to mechanical oral hygiene procedures for 4 to 6 weeks and 6 months. There is no evidence that one concentration of chlorhexidine rinse is more effective than another. There is insufficient evidence to determine the reduction in gingivitis associated with chlorhexidine mouthrinse use in individuals with mean GI scores of 1.1 to 3 indicating moderate or severe levels of gingival inflammation. Rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinse for 4 weeks or longer causes extrinsic tooth staining. In addition, other adverse effects such as calculus build up, transient taste disturbance and effects on the oral mucosa were reported in the included studies.

Oral mucosal decontamination with chlorhexidine for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in children - a randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of oral mucosal decontamination with chlorhexidine gel for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in children between 3 months and 15 yrs.

DESIGN

Double blind randomized placebo controlled trial.

SETTING

Pediatric intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital in North India.

PATIENTS

Eligible participants were patients aged 3 months to 15 yrs who required orotracheal or nasotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. Two hundred eighty-three children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit between November 2007 and April 2009 were screened. Eighty-six patients fulfilled the study requirements.

INTERVENTION

Either 1% chlorhexidine or placebo gel was applied on the buccal mucosa at 8-hr intervals for the entire duration of ventilation, subject to a maximum of 21 days. Patients were followed up for the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia, diagnosed using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia, duration of hospital stay, duration of intensive care unit stay, mortality, and characteristics of organisms isolated.

RESULTS

Fourty-one children received 1% chlorhexidine, whereas 45 received placebo application. Patients of both groups were comparable with respect to baseline characteristics. Incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia was 39.6/1,000 ventilator days with 1% chlorhexidine and 38.1/1,000 ventilator days with placebo (relative risk 1.03, confidence interval 0.44-2.42, p = .46). The duration of intensive care unit stay and hospital stay was a mean of 8.4 ± 5.8 vs. 9.6 ± 11.4 days (p = .58) and 16.1 ± 10.2 days vs. 15.1 ± 14.3 days (p = .19) with chlorhexidine and placebo, respectively. The mortality rates were similar in the two groups (p = .81). All but two isolates causing ventilator-associated pneumonia were gram-negative, with Acinetobacter species being the most common (14 of 26). No side effects of the applied gel were seen in either group.

CONCLUSION

Oral mucosal application on 1% chlorhexidine gel did not prevent the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia in children 3 months to 15 yrs age.

Reduced chlorhexidine tooth stain coverage by sequential administration of monoperoxyphthalic acid in the beagle dog

Extrinsic tooth stain is sometimes a side-effect observed with the chronic use of chlorhexidine-containing oral care products. This chlorhexidine (CHX)-induced tooth staining is observed both in humans as well as in experimental animals. The present study tested the hypothesis that the sequential administration of monoperoxyphthalic acid (MPA) will reduce the development of chlorhexidine-induced tooth stain coverage in a beagle dog. For this study, dogs were treated with 30 mL of mouthrinse b.i.d. for 28 days. The following treatment groups ( = 12 dogs/group) were tested: water (negative control), 1.0% MPA rinse, 0.12% CHX rinse, and 1.0% MPA rinse followed by 0.12% CHX rinse. The sequential dosing of 1.0% MPA followed by 0.12+ CHX resulted in significantly (p < or = 0.05) less tooth stain than when dogs were dosed with 0.12% CHX alone. Additionally, the sequential dosing of MPA followed by chlorhexidine resulted in a 75% reduction in plaque formation in this model, which was significantly different (p < or = 0.05) from results with either treatment alone. A further study demonstrated that similar results could be obtained when MPA plus CHX treatment alone. A further study demonstrated that similar results could be obtained when MPA plus CHX treatments were separated by approximately a five-hour period in an AM and PM schedule. We conclude that the oxidizer, MPA, can significantly reduce tooth stain induced by CHX while enhancing its antiplaque and antigingivitis activity.

Comparative staining in vitro and plaque inhibitory properties in vivo of 0.12% and 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses

The mere incorporation of an active ingredient in an oral hygiene product does not necessarily guarantee efficacy. As new formulations appear, it would seem prudent to at least screen for activity by comparison with an established product. The aim of this study was to compare a new 0.12% chlorhexidine containing rinse with a well researched 0.2% chlorhexidine rinse product. The rinses were firstly compared in vitro for dietary staining effects and in vivo for plaque inhibition. Both formulations in vitro produced progressive staining of acrylic specimens with increasing passages through a standard tea solution. The clinical investigation was a 3-treatment, randomised, double blind, crossover, 4-day plaque regrowth study, balanced for 1st and 2nd order residual effects and involving 24 volunteers. From a zero plaque baseline, volunteers suspended oral hygiene and rinsed 2 x per day with the allocated rinse. The chlorhexidine doses were 18 mg and 20 mg per rinse for the 0.12% and 0.2% formulations, respectively. Plaque was scored by area and index on day 5. The results showed that the 2 chlorhexidine rinses were similar in efficacy by comparison with the control rinse. These studies in vitro and in vivo indicate that the chlorhexidine in the new preparation is available and active and the product could find use in those preventive applications suggested for other chlorhexidine formulations.