The Effect of Cetylpyridinium Chloride Compared to Chlorhexidine Mouthwash on Scores of Plaque and Gingivitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Emmy Rowan Windhorst, Maud Joosstens, Eveline van der Sluijs, Dagmar Else Slot
{"title":"The Effect of Cetylpyridinium Chloride Compared to Chlorhexidine Mouthwash on Scores of Plaque and Gingivitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.","authors":"Emmy Rowan Windhorst, Maud Joosstens, Eveline van der Sluijs, Dagmar Else Slot","doi":"10.1111/idh.12916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness of cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwashes (MW) on plaque and gingivitis scores for patients with gingivitis, in brushing as well as non-brushing situations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of MEDLINE-PubMed and Cochrane-CENTRAL was conducted to identify clinical and randomised controlled trials comparing CPC and CHX mouthwashes on plaque and gingivitis scores. The staining index was evaluated as a secondary outcome. In addition, the risk of bias was assessed. The data was summarised using a descriptive approach, and whenever possible, a meta-analysis was conducted. The results for brushing and non-brushing studies were presented separately. Grading was applied using the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search resulted in 424 unique papers, from which 14 full-text papers providing 18 comparisons were selected. Different concentrations of CPC-MW (0.1%, 0.075%, 0.05%) and CHX-MW (0.2%, 0.12%) were used. The risk of bias was estimated to be low, moderate or high for each study. A meta-analysis for non-brushing models showed a significant favour for CHX-MW in plaque index scores (0.55 [95% CI: 0.19; 0.91], p = 0.003). For brushing, no significant differences were found between CPC-MW and CHX-MW. The descriptive analysis supports these findings. CHX-MW tends to stain more than CPC-MW.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is moderate certainty for a small statistically significant favourable effect of CHX-MW over CPC-MW for plaque control in non-brushing situations, but no difference between them for plaque and gingivitis prevention in brushing situations.</p>","PeriodicalId":13791,"journal":{"name":"International journal of dental hygiene","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of dental hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/idh.12916","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwashes (MW) on plaque and gingivitis scores for patients with gingivitis, in brushing as well as non-brushing situations.

Methods: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE-PubMed and Cochrane-CENTRAL was conducted to identify clinical and randomised controlled trials comparing CPC and CHX mouthwashes on plaque and gingivitis scores. The staining index was evaluated as a secondary outcome. In addition, the risk of bias was assessed. The data was summarised using a descriptive approach, and whenever possible, a meta-analysis was conducted. The results for brushing and non-brushing studies were presented separately. Grading was applied using the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence.

Results: The search resulted in 424 unique papers, from which 14 full-text papers providing 18 comparisons were selected. Different concentrations of CPC-MW (0.1%, 0.075%, 0.05%) and CHX-MW (0.2%, 0.12%) were used. The risk of bias was estimated to be low, moderate or high for each study. A meta-analysis for non-brushing models showed a significant favour for CHX-MW in plaque index scores (0.55 [95% CI: 0.19; 0.91], p = 0.003). For brushing, no significant differences were found between CPC-MW and CHX-MW. The descriptive analysis supports these findings. CHX-MW tends to stain more than CPC-MW.

Conclusion: There is moderate certainty for a small statistically significant favourable effect of CHX-MW over CPC-MW for plaque control in non-brushing situations, but no difference between them for plaque and gingivitis prevention in brushing situations.

氯化十六烷基吡啶漱口水与氯己定漱口水对牙菌斑和牙龈炎评分的影响:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
目的:评价氯化十六烷基吡啶(CPC)和氯己定(CHX)漱口水(MW)在刷牙和不刷牙情况下对牙龈炎患者菌斑和牙龈炎评分的影响。方法:对MEDLINE-PubMed和Cochrane-CENTRAL进行综合检索,以确定比较CPC和CHX漱口水对菌斑和牙龈炎评分的临床和随机对照试验。染色指数作为次要指标进行评估。此外,还对偏倚风险进行了评估。使用描述性方法总结数据,并尽可能进行荟萃分析。刷牙和不刷牙的研究结果分别发表。采用GRADE方法对证据的确定性进行评分。结果:检索得到424篇独特的论文,从中选择了14篇全文论文,提供了18个比较。采用不同浓度的CPC-MW(0.1%、0.075%、0.05%)和CHX-MW(0.2%、0.12%)。每项研究的偏倚风险估计为低、中、高。一项针对非刷牙模型的荟萃分析显示,CHX-MW在斑块指数评分方面具有显著优势(0.55 [95% CI: 0.19;0.91], p = 0.003)。在刷毛方面,CPC-MW与CHX-MW无显著差异。描述性分析支持这些发现。CHX-MW比CPC-MW更易染色。结论:CHX-MW在非刷牙情况下对菌斑的控制效果优于CPC-MW,但在刷牙情况下对菌斑和牙龈炎的预防效果无明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International journal of dental hygiene
International journal of dental hygiene DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Dental Hygiene is the official scientific peer-reviewed journal of the International Federation of Dental Hygienists (IFDH). The journal brings the latest scientific news, high quality commissioned reviews as well as clinical, professional and educational developmental and legislative news to the profession world-wide. Thus, it acts as a forum for exchange of relevant information and enhancement of the profession with the purpose of promoting oral health for patients and communities. The aim of the International Journal of Dental Hygiene is to provide a forum for exchange of scientific knowledge in the field of oral health and dental hygiene. A further aim is to support and facilitate the application of new knowledge into clinical practice. The journal welcomes original research, reviews and case reports as well as clinical, professional, educational and legislative news to the profession world-wide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信