The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2015 ) > List of Articles


Effectiveness of Oral Antiseptics on Tooth Biofilm: A Study in vivo

Mateus Rodrigues Tonetto, Matheus Coelho Bandéca, Etevaldo Matos Maia Filho, José Carlos Elias Mouchrek Junior, Lívia Helena de Araújo Castro Nunes, Cleidiane Silveira Arruda, Claudia de Castro Rizzi, Adriana Quinzeiro e Silva Mouchrek, Rudys Rodolfo De Jesus Tavarez

Citation Information : Tonetto MR, Bandéca MC, Filho EM, Junior JC, Nunes LH, Arruda CS, de Castro Rizzi C, Mouchrek AQ, Tavarez RR. Effectiveness of Oral Antiseptics on Tooth Biofilm: A Study in vivo. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015; 16 (8):674-678.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1739

Published Online: 01-02-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2015; The Author(s).



To evaluate the effectiveness of five different mouthwashes through measurement of the plaque index.

Materials and methods

Fifty subjects took part in this blind study, randomized into blocks of five groups according to the active ingredient of the mouthwash: CHX group (0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate), essential oils (EO) group, cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) group, Tri group (triclosan) and Hamamelis virginiana (HV) group. All subjects were evaluated for a reduction in the bacterial plaque index at 7, 14 and 21 days.


There was a significant reduction in the mean plaque index during the period of evaluation (p < 0.01), and the reduction during the period of evaluation was different between mouthwashes (p < 0.01). The reduction in the plaque index at the end of 21 days was, in decreasing order, CHX > EO > CPC > Tri > HV.


The reduction in the plaque index during the period of evaluation was different between the types of mouthwash. The mouthwash containing the active ingredient chlorhexidine was the most effective, followed by the essential oil, cetylpyridinium chloride, triclosan and H. virginiana.

How to cite this article

Junior Mouchrek JCE, Nunes LHAC, Arruda CS, Rizzi CC, Mouchrek AQS, Tavarez RRJ, Tonetto MR, Bandeca MC, Maia Filho EM. Effectiveness of Oral Antiseptics on Tooth Biofilm: A Study in vivo. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015;16(8):674-678.

PDF Share
  1. Experimental Gingivitis in Man. J Periodontol 1965;36:177-187.
  2. Effect of oral hygiene and 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate oral rinse in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia after cardiovascular surgery. Respir Care 2014;59(4):504-509.
  3. Prevention and control of periodontal diseases in developing and industrialized nations. Periodontol 2000 2002;29:235-246.
  4. Int J Dent Hyg 2008;6(4):290-303.
  5. Chemotherapeutic agents for controlling plaque and gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol 1988;15(8):488-498.
  6. The rationale for the daily use of an antimicrobial mouthrinse. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137 Suppl:16S-21.
  7. Daily biofilm control and oral health: consensus on the epidemiological challenge—Latin American Advisory Panel. Braz Oral Res 2012;26(Suppl 1):133-143.
  8. Relationship between plaqueinhibiting effect and retention of chlorhexidine in the human oral cavity. Arch Oral Biol 1974;19(11):1031-104.
  9. Chlorhexidine: is it still the gold standard? Periodontol 2000 1997;15:55-62.
  10. Efficacy of cetylpyridinium chloride used as oropharyngeal antiseptic. Arzneimittelforschung 2001;51(7):588-595.
  11. Dentifrices: an update. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010;15(6):e976-982.
  12. A clinical investigation of the efficacy of two dentifrices for controlling established supragingival plaque and gingivitis. J Clin Dent 2008;19(3):85-94.
  13. A clinical investigation of the efficacy of two dentifrices for the reduction of supragingival calculus formation. J Clin Dent 2008;19(3):102-105.
  14. Essential oils: their antibacterial properties and potential applications in foods: a review. Int J Food Microbiol 2004;94(3):223-253.
  15. Antiviral and antiphlogistic activities of Hamamelis virginiana bark. Planta Med 1996;62(3):241-245.
  16. High molecular compounds (polysaccharides and proanthocyanidins) from Hamamelis virginiana bark: influence on human skin keratinocyte proliferation and differentiation and influence on irritated skin. Phytochemistry 2001;58(6):949-958.
  17. Hamamelis in children with skin disorders and skin injuries: results of an observational study. Eur J Pediatr 2007;166(9):943-948.
  18. Proanthocyanidins from the bark of Hamamelis virginiana exhibit antimutagenic properties against nitroaromatic compounds. Planta Med 1998;64(4):324-327.
  19. Antioxidants in medicinal plant extracts. A research study of the antioxidant capacity of Crataegus, Hamamelis and Hydrastis. Phytother Res 2000;14(8):612-616.
  20. Highly galloylated tannin fractions from witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana) bark: electron transfer capacity, in vitro antioxidant activity, and effects on skin-related cells. Chem Res Toxicol 2008;21(3):696-704.
  21. The plaque control record. J Periodontol 1972;43(1):38.
  22. Antiseptic mouth rinses: an update on comparative effectiveness, risks and recommendations. J Dent Hyg 2013;87(1):10-18.
  23. Chlorhexidine in dental practice. J Clin Periodontol 1974;1(3):143-152.
  24. Clinical efficacy of antimicrobial mouthrinses. J Dent 2010;38(Suppl 1):S6-10.
  25. J Periodontol 2011;82(2):174-194.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.