Antimicrobial activity of mouth rinses against bacteria that initially colonizes dental’s surface
Isaac Jordão de Souza ARAÚJO, Marília Souza de CARVALHO, Thaís Rossini de OLIVEIRA, Regina Maria PUPPIN-RONTANI, José Francisco HÖFLING, Renata de Oliveira MATTOS-GRANER, Rafael Nóbrega STIPP
Abstract
Introduction: Much advertising in mouthwash is conveyed in all media appealing to the anti-plaque effect and rendering a disservice to the community. Mouth rinses are available over-the-count and differ on their compositions and antimicrobial effectiveness. Objective: In this study, we evaluated the antimicrobial activity of 35 widely available mouth rinses against bacterial species involved in initiation of dental biofilm – Streptococcus gordonii, Streptococcus mitis, Streptococcus oralis, Streptococcus salivarius, and Streptococcus sanguinis. Material and method: The Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) and the Minimum Bactericidal Concentration (MBC) of the evaluated mouth rinses were determined according to the Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute protocols. Data were submitted to Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney post hoc (α=0.05). Result: About 70% of the mouth rinses achieved high antibacterial activity and 30%, a low antibacterial activity against all the species tested. The most ineffective mouth rinse showed antibacterial activity (MIC) at 1:1 dilution, while the most effective showed activity even at 1:2048 dilution, which may imply prolonged effect in the mouth. About 51% of mouth rinses showed bactericidal activity, and it was verified that cetylpyridinium chloride or chlorhexidine digluconate containing in the formulation were associated with the highest activity. Conclusion: Most - but not all - mouth rinses commercially available are effective in inhibiting in vitro initial colonizers of dental surfaces.
Keywords
References
1. Kolenbrander PE, Andersen RN, Blehert DS, Egland PG, Foster JS, Palmer RJ Jr. Communication among oral bacteria. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2002 Sep;66(3):486-505.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.66.3.486-505.2002. PMid:12209001.
2. Li J, Helmerhorst EJ, Leone CW, Troxler RF, Yaskell T, Haffajee AD, et al. Identification of early microbial colonizers in human dental biofilm. J Appl Microbiol. 2004;97(6):1311-8.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2004.02420.x. PMid:15546422.
3. Heller D, Helmerhorst EJ, Gower AC, Siqueira WL, Paster BJ, Oppenheim FG. Microbial diversity in the early, in vivo -formed, dental biofilm. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016 Mar;82(6):1881-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.03984-15. PMid:26746720.
4. Sälzer S, Slot DE, Van Der Weijden FA, Dörfer CE. Efficacy of inter-dental mechanical plaque control in managing gingivitis: a meta-review. J Clin Periodontol. 2015 Apr;42(Suppl 16):S92-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12363. PMid:25581718.
5. Lynch MC, Cortelli SC, McGuire JA, Zhang J, Ricci-Nittel D, Mordas CJ, et al. The effects of essential oil mouthrinses with or without alcohol on plaque and gingivitis: a randomized controlled clinical study. BMC Oral Health. 2018 Jan;18(1):6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0454-6. PMid:29321067.
6. Sanz M, Serrano J, Iniesta M, Santa Cruz I, Herrera D. Antiplaque and antigingivitis toothpastes. MonogrOral Sci. 2013;23:27-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000350465. PMid:23817058.
7. McDonnell G, Russell AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999 Jan;12(1):147-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/CMR.12.1.147. PMid:9880479.
8. Ouhayoun JP. Penetrating the plaque biofilm: impact of essential oil mouthwash. J Clin Periodontol. 2003;30(Suppl 5):10-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.30.s5.4.x. PMid:12787196.
9. Karpiński TM, Szkaradkiewicz AK. Chlorhexidine-pharmaco-biological activity and application. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2015 Apr;19(7):1321-6. PMid:25912596.
10. Levy CW, Roujeinikova A, Sedelnikova S, Baker PJ, Stuitje AR, Slabas AR, et al. The molecular basis of inhibition of enoyl reductase by triclosan. Nature. 1999 Apr;398:383-4.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/18803. PMid:10201369.
11. Elworthy A, Greenman J, Doherty FM, Newcombe RG, Addy M. The substantivity of a number of oral hygiene products determined by the duration of effects on salivary bacteria. J Periodontol. 1996 Jun;67(6):572-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1902/jop.1996.67.6.572. PMid:8794966.
12. Wakamatsu R, Takenaka S, Ohsumi T, Terao Y, Ohshima H, Okiji T. Penetration kinetics of four mouthrinses into Streptococcus mutans biofilms analyzed by direct time-lapse visualization. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(2):625-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1002-7. PMid:23716063.
13. Latimer J, Munday JL, Buzza KM, Forbes S, Sreenivasan PK, McBain AJ. Antibacterial and anti-biofilm activity of mouthrinses containing cetylpyridinium chloride and sodium fluoride. BMC Microbiol. 2015 Aug;15(1):169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-015-0501-x. PMid:26293609.
14. Krithikadatta J, Datta M, Gopikrishna V. CRIS Guidelines (Checklist for Reporting In-vitro Studies): a concept note on the need for standardized guidelines for improving quality and transparency in reporting in-vitro studies in experimental dental research. J Conserv Dent. 2014 Jul;17(4):301-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.136338. PMid:25125839.
15. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute – CLSI. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically: approved standard. 10th ed. Wayne: CLSI; 2015. CLSI document M07-A10.
16. Slot DE, De Geest S, van der Weijden FA, Quirynen M. Treatment of oral malodour. Medium-term efficacy of mechanical and/or chemical agents: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2015 Apr;42(Suppl 16):S303-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12378. PMid:25682952.
17. Garcia-Godoy F, Klukowska MA, Zhang YH, Anastasia MK, Cheng R, Gabbard M, et al. Comparative bioavailability and antimicrobial activity of cetylpyridinium chloride mouthrinses in vitro and in vivo. Am J Dent. 2014 Aug;27(4):185-90. PMid:25831600.
18. James P, Worthington HV, Parnell C, Harding M, Lamont T, Cheung A, et al. Chlorhexidine mouthrinse as an adjunctive treatment for gingival health. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar;3:CD008676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008676.pub2. PMid:28362061.
19. Furiga A, Dols-Lafargue M, Heyraud A, Chambat G, Lonvaud-Funel A, Badet C. Effect of antiplaque compounds and mouthrinses on the activity of glucosyltransferases from Streptococcus sobrinus and insoluble glucan production. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 2008 Oct;23(5):391-400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-302X.2008.00441.x. PMid:18793362.
20. Liu J, Ling JQ, Wu CD. Cetylpyridinium chloride suppresses gene expression associated with halitosis. Arch Oral Biol. 2013 Nov;58(11):1686-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2013.08.014. PMid:24112735.
21. Pan PC, Harper S, Ricci-Nittel D, Lux R, Shi W. In-vitro evidence for efficacy of antimicrobial mouthrinses. J Dent. 2010 Jun;38(Suppl 1):S16-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(10)70006-3. PMid:20621239.
22. Evans A, Leishman SJ, Walsh LJ, Seow WK. Inhibitory effects of antiseptic mouthrinses on Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sanguinis and Lactobacillus acidophilus. Aust Dent J. 2015 Jun;60(2):247-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/adj.12312. PMid:25989101.
23. Thomas EL, Milligan TW, Joyner RE, Jefferson MM. Antibacterial activity of hydrogen peroxide and the lactoperoxidase- hydrogen peroxide-thiocyanate system against oral streptococci. Infect Immun. 1994 Feb;62(2):529-35. PMid:8300211.
24. Ten Cate JM. Contemporary perspective on the use of fluoride products in caries prevention. Br Dent J. 2013 Feb;214(4):161-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.162. PMid:23429124.
25. Dinwiddie MT, Terry PD, Chen J. Recent evidence regarding triclosan and cancer risk. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Feb;11(2):2209- 17. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110202209. PMid:24566048.
Submitted date:
12/03/2018
Accepted date:
02/19/2019
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email