View clinical trials related to Oral Biofilm.
Filter by:This in-vivo study investigates early (48h), mature (2 weeks) and long-term (3 months) biofilm formation and composition on temporary push-on cones (exchangeable conical rings) made of noble-alloy-based materials (Pagalinor, PA) in comparison to Titanium-6Aluminum-7Niobium alloy (TAN) presently used in the transmucosal portion of dental implant abutments.
The Essential oils (EO) are composed by a wide diversity of products. Therefore, their antimicrobial activity will be related to their composition, configuration, amount and their possible interaction. The traditional formulation containing EO (T-EO) is a complex mixture of phenolic compounds combined with determinate EO: 0.092% of eucalyptol, 0.064% of thymol, 0.06% of methyl-salicylate and y 0.042% of menthol. All of this solved in a hydroalcoholic vehicle containing from a 21.6% to a 26.9% of alcohol. Thus, T-EO contain ethanol, which is a chemical compound used in order to dissolve and stabilize the numerous substances present in the rinse. The concentration of ethanol present in the T-EO rinses, as previously said, is more than 20%. This concentration of ethanol, higher than 20%, is been found sufficient to dissolve the EO but insufficient to have a direct antibacterial effect. In fact, the manufacturer presents the alcohol contain (21.6%), among others, as an inactive ingredient in its formula. Over the years, the adequacy of the use of ethanol in mouthwashes, as well as their effects on the surfaces of composite restorations and their possible role in development of oropharyngeal cancer have been discussed. Although a direct cause-and-effect correlation between the development of oropharyngeal carcinoma and the use of alcohol-based rinses has not been demonstrated and probably it will never be (at least by epidemiological studies), it is considered desirable to eliminate ethanol from daily mouthwashes, especially for those patients at higher risk. Furthermore, the fact that the alcohol is present in its formula, have produced that some clinical practitioners do not prescribe the traditional formula due to the controversy of the issue. All this have lead to the development of new, alcohol free formulations of EO (Af-EO). The composition of the Af-EO is exactly the same in their active ingredients (Eucalyptol, Thymol, Methyl-salycilate and Menthol), but sodium fluoride has been added. Some differences are found in their inactive ingredients. These are based on the alcohol containing of the T-EO, without presence in the Af-EO and the presence of Propylene Glycol, sodium lauryl sulfate and sucralose in the Af-EO, without presence in the T-EO. In order to measure the efficacy of a mouthwash against the dental plaque two different concepts should be defined: the substantivity and antiplaque effect. The substantivity of an oral antiseptic is defined as the prolonged adherence to the oral surfaces and its slow release at effective doses which guarantee the persistence of the antimicrobial activity. The more substantivity an oral antiseptic has the better. For its study in vivo, the most popular models are those which analyze the effect that a single mouthwash has in a mature biofilm. The second aspect that should be studied from an oral antiseptic, the antiplaque effect, is defined as the capacity that an agent has to avoid the formation of bacterial aggregates (plaque) on the oral surfaces. For its study in vivo, models start from a baseline sample with levels of plaque near to 0 in order to assess the power of the antiseptic to reduce the formation of bacterial plaque (normally dental plaque) against the control. A clinical study of 6 months using a determinate antiplaque agent is necessary in order to tag an antiseptic as effective. However, in the literature, there is an established model of 4 days of plaque regrowing which can assess the inhibitory activity that the mouthwashes have per se; furthermore, it determines the relative efficacy of the different formulations being considered as predictable of the antiplaque effect of an antiseptic. In addition, another important factor in the study in vivo of an oral antiseptic is the necessity to conserve intact the oral biofilm at all stages: formation, recollection and analysis of the oral samples. This is in order not to interfere the delicate three dimensional structure of the oral biofilm which has been proven to be essential in the resistance to the effects of an external antiseptic agent. For these reasons, the study of the oral biofilm with the help of intraoral disks hold in specially designed apparatus combined with the application of the Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy have proved to be very valuable at the study of the oral biofilm in its intact hydrated natural state. Since an alcohol free formulation of the EO have come up to the market, it seems convenient to compare its effects to the traditional one. Although some studies comparing the effects of T-EO and Af-EO have been found, none of them assessed and compared their substantivity and antiplaque effect in an in vivo model of structured oral biofilm. For this reason, the aim of the present study was to compare the in vivo antibacterial effect (immediate effect, substantivity and antiplaque effect) of the EO with and without alcohol in structured oral biofilm.
The study has the objective to compare two different methodology of application the antiseptic on the oral biofilm will be formed during 48h in situ on a specific device. The first one using the immersion in the antiseptic solution, as much of the authors did in the past. And the second way doing a active mouthwash, as the manufacturer recommends. The study will compare two different antiseptic solutions, the chlorhexidine (0.2% Oraldine Perio) and the essential oils (Listerine Mentol) with the two different application and compared the bacterial vitality, thickness and covering grade between solutions and with a basal sample.
The accumulation and maturation of oral biofilm in the gingival margin is widely recognised to be the primary aetiological factor in the development of chronic gingivitis. Based on this association, the current treatment of gingivitis is focused on biofilm disruption, which will normally include mechanical processes, both professionally and at home. However, for patients, it is not easy to achieve a proper level of plaque control. The efficient plaque control techniques are very time consuming and require a special motivation and skills for their optimum use. It was at this point where mouthwashes become important, due to the fact that they include diverse types of antimicrobial agents to complement the results of mechanical oral hygiene measures. Chlorhexidine is considered the "gold standard" of oral antiseptics; nevertheless it has not been recommended for long periods of time due to its well-known secondary effects. All of these inconveniences have limited its acceptability among dental professionals and users; in contrast, however, are the exceptional antiseptic properties, promoting the interest of researchers in other alternative antiplaque agents. Mouthwashes containing essential oils in their formulation have received a lot of attention. Their antiplaque activity has been demonstrated in numerous clinical studies, in which they were used in conjunction with mechanical oral hygiene measures. In order to achieve a better understanding of the clinical effects that antimicrobial agents produce in the interior of the biofilm, it is necessary to apply a methodology in which the biofilm grows directly in the interior of the oral cavity but its three dimensional structure is not distorted by manipulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in situ antiplaque effect of 2 antimicrobial agents (essential oils formulation and 0.2% chlorhexidine) in the short term with a posterior analysis on "non-destructured" biofilm with Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope combined with fluorescence staining.