Essential Oils Compared to Chlorhexidine With Respect to Plaque and Parameters of Gingival Inflammation: A Systematic Review

Clinic for Periodontology, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
Journal of Periodontology (Impact Factor: 2.57). 11/2010; 82(2):174-94. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2010.100266
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this review is to systematically evaluate the effects of an essential-oil mouthwash (EOMW) compared to a chlorhexidine mouthwash with respect to plaque and parameters of gingival inflammation.
PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched for studies up to and including September 2010 to identify appropriate articles. A comprehensive search was designed, and the articles were independently screened for eligibility by two reviewers. Articles that evaluated the effects of the EOMW compared to chlorhexidine mouthwash were included. Where appropriate, a meta-analysis was performed, and weighted mean differences (WMDs) were calculated.
A total of 390 unique articles were found, of which 19 articles met the eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis of long-term studies (duration ≥ 4 weeks) showed that the chlorhexidine mouthwash provided significantly better effects regarding plaque control than EOMW (WMD: 0.19; P = 0.0009). No significant difference with respect to reduction of gingival inflammation was found between EOMW and chlorhexidine mouthwash (WMD: 0.03; P = 0.58).
In long-term use, the standardized formulation of EOMW appeared to be a reliable alternative to chlorhexidine mouthwash with respect to parameters of gingival inflammation.

  • Source
    • "As a consequence, a number of rinsing agents for daily use have been developed, of which the essential oil product Listerine Ò is the most studied and celebrated. Listerine Ò is a group of alcohol containing mouthwashes suggested to be potent inhibitors of plaque formation [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]. However, most of the scientific documentation of Listerine Ò has been obtained with 5% hydro-alcohol solutions as the negative control [9,10,12–17]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Background. Studies have reported commercially available essential oils with convincing plaque and gingivitis preventing properties. However, no tests have compared these essential oils, i.e. Listerine®, against their true vehicle controls. Objective. To compare the plaque and gingivitis inhibiting effect of a commercially-available essential oil (Listerine® Total Care) to a negative (22% hydro-alcohol solution) and a positive (0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX)) control in an experimental gingivitis model. Materials and methods. In three groups of 15 healthy volunteers, experimental gingivitis was induced and monitored over 21 days, simultaneously treated with Listerine® Total Care (test), 22% hydro-alcohol solution (negative control) and 0.2% chlorhexidine solution (positive control), respectively. The upper right quadrant of each individual received mouthwash only, whereas the upper left quadrant was subject to both rinses and mechanical oral hygiene. Plaque, gingivitis and side-effects were assessed at day 7, 14 and 21. Results. After 21 days, the chlorhexidine group showed significantly lower average plaque and gingivitis scores than the Listerine® and alcohol groups, whereas there was little difference between the two latter. Conclusion. Listerine® Total Care had no statistically significant effect on plaque formation as compared to its vehicle control.
    Acta odontologica Scandinavica 05/2013; 71(6). DOI:10.3109/00016357.2013.782506 · 1.31 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to evaluate the antiplaque effect of a new alcohol free essential oil mouthwash with respect to a control of an essential oil with alcohol mouthwash, using an in vivo plaque regrowth model of 3-days. The study was designed as a double-masked, randomized, crossover clinical trial, involving 30 volunteers to compare two different essential oil containing mouthwashes, during a 3-day plaque accumulation model. After receiving a thorough professional prophylaxis at the baseline, over the next 3-days each volunteer refrained from all oral hygiene measures and had two daily rinses with 20 ml of the test mouthwash (alcohol free essential oil) or the control mouthwash (essential oil with alcohol). At the end of the each experimental period, plaque was assessed and the panelists filled out a questionnaire. Each subject underwent a 14 days washout period and there was a second allocation. The essential oil mouthwash with ethanol shows a better inhibitory effect of plaque regrowth in 3-days than the mouthwash test with only essential oil in the whole mouth (plaque index = 2.18 against 2.46, respectively, p < 0.05); for the lower jaw (plaque index = 2.28 against 2.57, respectively, p < 0.05); for the upper jaw (plaque index = 2.08 against 2.35, respectively, p < 0.05); for the incisors (plaque index = 1.93 against 2.27, respectively, p < 0.05); and the canines (plaque index = 1.99 against 2.47, respectively, p < 0.05). The essential oil containing mouthwash without alcohol seems to have a less inhibiting effect on the plaque regrowth than the traditional alcoholic solution.
    Trials 12/2011; 12:262. DOI:10.1186/1745-6215-12-262 · 2.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Residual pockets are challenging sites that require additional periodontal therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a single photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunct to scaling and root planning (SRP) in residual pockets in single-rooted teeth. A blind, split-mouth, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted in systemically healthy subjects presenting at least two residual pockets (probing pocket depth (PPD) ≥5 mm with bleeding on probing (BoP)) in single root teeth in supportive periodontal therapy. The selected sites were assigned to receive (1) PDT + SRP or (2) SRP. In sites treated by PDT as adjunctive to SRP, the laser system included a handheld battery-operated diode laser with a wavelength of 660 nm, a power output of 60 mW, and energy density of 129 J/cm(2), together with methylene blue as a photosensitizer (10 mg/ml). Clinical parameters were assessed at baseline and 3 months post-therapies. Clinical parameters improved significantly after both therapies (p < 0.05), whereas higher probing pocket depth reduction and clinical attachment level gain were observed in the PDT + SRP group at 3 months (p < 0.05). In addition, sites treated by the combined approach yielded a significant reduction in the number of sites with PPD <5 mm without BoP after 3 months compared to sites treated by conventional SRP alone (p < 0.05). PDT as an adjunctive to mechanical debridement demonstrated additional clinical benefits for residual pockets in single-rooted teeth and may be an alternative therapeutic strategy in supportive periodontal maintenance.
    Lasers in Medical Science 07/2012; 28. DOI:10.1007/s10103-012-1159-3 · 2.42 Impact Factor
Show more


Available from