Cureus · 2026
Comparison of the Efficacy of Pre-procedural Rinses Using 0.2% Chlorhexidine Gluconate Versus a Stabilized Chlorine Dioxide Mouthwash in Patients With Chronic Periodontitis: A Clinico-Microbiological Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kalra Charu, Tandon Shruti, Lamba Arundeep K, Saxena Sonal, Faraz Farrukh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Aerosols produced during dental procedures carry a high microbial load, increasing the risk of cross-infection between patients and dental professionals. The use of pre-procedural mouth rinses is a simple, cost-effective, and practical measure to reduce microbial contamination in aerosols generated during dental treatment.
AIM: This study aimed to assess and compare the effectiveness of 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) and 0.1% stabilized chlorine dioxide (ClO₂) when used as pre-procedural rinses in patients with chronic periodontitis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 48 systemically healthy individuals with chronic periodontitis were randomly allocated to two groups: Group I (CHX) and Group II (ClO₂), with 24 participants in each group. Unstimulated saliva samples were obtained before and after rinsing. Microbial evaluation was done by quantifying aerobic and anaerobic colony-forming units (CFUs). Participants also recorded their perception of taste and odor using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Data were analyzed using paired and unpaired t-tests, with significance considered at p ≤ 0.05.
RESULTS: CHX showed a significant reduction (81.96%) in aerobic culture, whereas ClO₂ showed no statistical significance in reduction (40.91%) in aerobic culture. Both rinses produced a significant decline in anaerobic CFU counts; Group I showed an 86.05% reduction, and Group II showed a 79.75% reduction in microbial load. ClO₂ was rated higher on the VAS scale, reflecting better taste and odor acceptability.
CONCLUSION: Both CHX and ClO₂ effectively lowered anaerobic bacterial counts. While CHX had a stronger effect against aerobic bacteria, ClO₂ offered greater patient acceptability, supporting its use as a viable alternative in routine dental practice.
AIM: This study aimed to assess and compare the effectiveness of 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) and 0.1% stabilized chlorine dioxide (ClO₂) when used as pre-procedural rinses in patients with chronic periodontitis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 48 systemically healthy individuals with chronic periodontitis were randomly allocated to two groups: Group I (CHX) and Group II (ClO₂), with 24 participants in each group. Unstimulated saliva samples were obtained before and after rinsing. Microbial evaluation was done by quantifying aerobic and anaerobic colony-forming units (CFUs). Participants also recorded their perception of taste and odor using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Data were analyzed using paired and unpaired t-tests, with significance considered at p ≤ 0.05.
RESULTS: CHX showed a significant reduction (81.96%) in aerobic culture, whereas ClO₂ showed no statistical significance in reduction (40.91%) in aerobic culture. Both rinses produced a significant decline in anaerobic CFU counts; Group I showed an 86.05% reduction, and Group II showed a 79.75% reduction in microbial load. ClO₂ was rated higher on the VAS scale, reflecting better taste and odor acceptability.
CONCLUSION: Both CHX and ClO₂ effectively lowered anaerobic bacterial counts. While CHX had a stronger effect against aerobic bacteria, ClO₂ offered greater patient acceptability, supporting its use as a viable alternative in routine dental practice.