Dataset Information

Mouthwash Effects on LGG-Integrated Experimental Oral Biofilms.

ABSTRACT: In order to investigate the effects of mouthwashes on oral biofilms with probiotics, we compared in biofilms the susceptibility to mouthwashes of probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) and oral pathogens Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sanguinis, and Candida albicans. We also evaluated these pathogens' susceptibility to the mouthwashes and their recovery after mouthwash-rinsing in biofilms with/without LGG. First, 1-day-/3-day-old LGG-integrated multi-species biofilms were exposed for 1 min to mouthwashes containing chlorhexidine, essential oils, or amine fluoride/stannous fluoride. Cells were plate-counted and relative survival rates (RSRs) of LGG and pathogens calculated. Second, 1-day-/3-day-old multispecies biofilms with and without LGG were exposed for 1 min to mouthwashes; cells were plate-counted and the pathogens' RSRs were calculated. Third, 1-day-old biofilms were treated for 1 min with mouthwashes. Cells were plate-counted immediately and after 2-day cultivation. Recovery rates of pathogens were calculated and compared between biofilms with/without LGG. Live/Dead® staining served for structural analyses. Our results showed that RSRs of LGG were insignificantly smaller than those of pathogens in both 1-day and 3-day biofilms. No significant differences appeared in pathogens' RSRs and recovery rates after treatment between biofilms with/without LGG. To conclude, biofilm LGG was susceptible to the mouthwashes; but biofilm LGG altered neither the mouthwash effects on oral pathogens nor affected their recovery.

SUBMITTER: Jiang Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7560143 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mouthwash Effects on LGG-Integrated Experimental Oral Biofilms.

Jiang Qingru Q Kainulainen Veera V Stamatova Iva I Janket Sok-Ja SJ Meurman Jukka H JH Korpela Riitta R

Dentistry journal 20200901 3

In order to investigate the effects of mouthwashes on oral biofilms with probiotics, we compared in biofilms the susceptibility to mouthwashes of probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) and oral pathogens Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sanguinis, and Candida albicans. We also evaluated these pathogens' susceptibility to the mouthwashes and their recovery after mouthwash-rinsing in biofilms with/without LGG. First, 1-day-/3-day-old LGG-integrated multi-species ...[more]

PMID: 32882798

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionChlorhexidine (CHX) and essential oil containing mouthwashes like Listerine® can improve oral hygiene via suppressing oral microbes. In hospitalized patients, CHX mouthwash reduces the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. However, CHX use was also associated with increased mortality, which might be related to nitrate-reducing bacteria. Currently, no study determines oral bacteria targeted by essential oils mouthwash in hospitalized patients using a metagenomic approach.MethodsWe recruited 87 hospitalized patients from a previous randomized control study, and assigned them to three mouthwash groups: CHX, Listerine, and normal saline (control). Before and after gargling the mouthwash twice a day for 5-7 days, oral bacteria were examined using a 16S rDNA approach.ResultsAlpha diversities at the genus level decreased significantly only for the CHX and Listerine groups. Only for the two groups, oral microbiota before and after gargling were significantly different, but not clearly distinct. Paired analysis eliminated the substantial individual differences and revealed eight bacterial genera (including Prevotella, Fusobacterium, and Selenomonas) with a decreased relative abundance, while Rothia increased after gargling the CHX mouthwash. After gargling Listerine, seven genera (including Parvimonas, Eubacterium, and Selenomonas) showed a decreased relative abundance, and the magnitudes were smaller compared to the CHX group. Fewer bacteria targeted by Listerine were reported to be nitrate-reducing compared to the CHX mouthwash.DiscussionIn conclusion, short-term gargling of the CHX mouthwash and Listerine altered oral microbiota in our hospitalized patients. The bacterial genera targeted by the CHX mouthwash and Listerine were largely different and the magnitudes of changes were smaller using Listerine. Functional alterations of gargling CHX and Listerine were also different. These findings can be considered for managing oral hygiene of hospitalized patients.

Project description:Oral bacteria play important roles in human health and disease. Oral samples collected using ethanol-containing mouthwash are widely used for oral microbiome studies. However, ethanol is flammable and not ideal for transportation/storage in large quantities, and some individuals may avoid ethanol due to the burning sensation or due to various personal, medical, religious, and/or cultural factors. Here, we compared ethanol-free and ethanol-containing mouthwashes using multiple microbiome metrics and assessed the stability of the mouthwash samples stored up to 10 days before processing. Forty volunteers provided oral wash samples collected using ethanol-free and ethanol-containing mouthwashes. From each sample, one aliquot was immediately frozen, one was stored at 4°C for 5 days and frozen, while the third aliquot was stored for 5 days at 4°C and 5 days at ambient temperature to mimic shipping delays and then frozen. DNA was extracted, the 16S rRNA gene V4 region was amplified and sequenced, and bioinformatic processing was performed using QIIME 2. Microbiome metrics measured in the two mouthwash types were very similar, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for alpha and beta diversity metrics greater than 0.85. Relative abundances of some taxa were significantly different, but ICCs of the top four most abundant phyla and genera were high (> 0.75) for the comparability of the mouthwashes. Stability during delayed processing was also high for both mouthwashes based on alpha and beta diversity measures and relative abundances of the top four phyla and genera (ICCs ≥ 0.90). These results demonstrate ethanol-free mouthwash performs similarly to ethanol-containing mouthwash for microbial analyses, and both mouthwashes are stable for at least 10 days without freezing prior to laboratory processing. Ethanol-free mouthwash is suitable for collecting and shipping oral wash samples, and these results have important implications for planning future epidemiologic studies of the oral microbiome.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious research has shown the oxidizing properties and microbiological efficacies of chlorine dioxide (ClO2). Its clinical efficacies on oral malodor have been evaluated and reported only in short duration trials, moreover, no clinical studies have investigated its microbiological efficacies on periodontal and malodorous bacteria. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the inhibitory effects of a mouthwash containing ClO2 used for 7 days on morning oral malodor and on salivary periodontal and malodorous bacteria.Methods/designA randomized, double blind, crossover, placebo-controlled trial was conducted among 15 healthy male volunteers, who were divided into 2 groups. Subjects were instructed to rinse with the experimental mouthwash containing ClO2 or the placebo mouthwash, without ClO2, twice per day for 7 days. After a one week washout period, each group then used the opposite mouthwash for 7 days. At baseline and after 7 days, oral malodor was evaluated with Organoleptic measurement (OM), and analyzed the concentrations of hydrogen sulfide (H2S), methyl mercaptan (CH3SH) and dimethyl sulfide ((CH3)2S), the main VSCs of human oral malodor, were assessed by gas chromatography (GC). Clinical outcome variables included plaque and gingival indices, and tongue coating index. The samples of saliva were microbiologically investigated. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed using the polymerase chain reaction-Invader method.Results and discussionThe baseline oral condition in healthy subjects in the 2 groups did not differ significantly. After rinsing with the mouthwash containing ClO2 for 7 days, morning bad breath decreased as measured by the OM and reduced the concentrations of H2S, CH3SH and (CH3)2S measured by GC, were found. Moreover ClO2 mouthwash used over a 7-day period appeared effective in reducing plaque, tongue coating accumulation and the counts of Fusobacterium nucleatum in saliva. Future research is needed to examine long-term effects, as well as effects on periodontal diseases and plaque accumulation in a well-defined sample of halitosis patients and broader population samples.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00748943.

Project description:ImportanceOral mucositis causes substantial morbidity during head and neck radiotherapy. In a randomized study, doxepin mouthwash was shown to reduce oral mucositis-related pain. A common mouthwash comprising diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid is also widely used.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of doxepin mouthwash or diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid mouthwash for the treatment of oral mucositis-related pain.Design, setting, and participantsA phase 3 randomized trial was conducted from November 1, 2014, to May 16, 2016, at 30 US institutions and included 275 patients who underwent definitive head and neck radiotherapy, had an oral mucositis pain score of 4 points or greater (scale, 0-10), and were followed up for a maximum of 28 days.InterventionsNinety-two patients were randomized to doxepin mouthwash (25 mg/5 mL water); 91 patients to diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid; and 92 patients to placebo.Main outcome and measuresThe primary end point was total oral mucositis pain reduction (defined by the area under the curve and adjusted for baseline pain score) during the 4 hours after a single dose of doxepin mouthwash or diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid mouthwash compared with a single dose of placebo. The minimal clinically important difference was a 3.5-point change. The secondary end points included drowsiness, unpleasant taste, and stinging or burning. All scales ranged from 0 (best) to 10 (worst).ResultsAmong the 275 patients randomized (median age, 61 years; 58 [21%] women), 227 (83%) completed treatment per protocol. Mucositis pain during the first 4 hours decreased by 11.6 points in the doxepin mouthwash group, by 11.7 points in the diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid mouthwash group, and by 8.7 points in the placebo group. The between-group difference was 2.9 points (95% CI, 0.2-6.0; P = .02) for doxepin mouthwash vs placebo and 3.0 points (95% CI, 0.1-5.9; P = .004) for diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid mouthwash vs placebo. More drowsiness was reported with doxepin mouthwash vs placebo (by 1.5 points [95% CI, 0-4.0]; P = .03), unpleasant taste (by 1.5 points [95% CI, 0-3.0]; P = .002), and stinging or burning (by 4.0 points [95% CI, 2.5-5.0]; P < .001). Maximum grade 3 adverse events for the doxepin mouthwash occurred in 3 patients (4%); diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid mouthwash, 3 (4%); and placebo, 2 (2%). Fatigue was reported by 5 patients (6%) in the doxepin mouthwash group and no patients in the diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid mouthwash group.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients undergoing head and neck radiotherapy, the use of doxepin mouthwash or diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid mouthwash vs placebo significantly reduced oral mucositis pain during the first 4 hours after administration; however, the effect size was less than the minimal clinically important difference. Further research is needed to assess longer-term efficacy and safety for both mouthwashes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02229539.

Dataset Information

Mouthwash Effects on LGG-Integrated Experimental Oral Biofilms.

Publications

Mouthwash Effects on LGG-Integrated Experimental Oral Biofilms.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets