Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Home | About JISP | Search | Accepted articles | Online Early | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | SubmissionSubscribeLogin 
Users Online: 2180  Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font sizeWide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout


 
   Table of Contents    
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 534-538  

Comparative evaluation of efficacy of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite (Hi Wash) mouthwash with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash on plaque-induced gingivitis: A clinical trial


Departments of Periodontics and Implantology, Hitkarini Dental College and Hospital, Hitkarini Hills, Dumna Airport Road, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India

Date of Submission15-Jan-2019
Date of Acceptance26-Apr-2019
Date of Web Publication27-Nov-2019

Correspondence Address:
Rohit Mishra
D-29 Kachnar City, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur - 482 002, Madhya Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jisp.jisp_32_19

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 


Background: Bleeding gums are one of the common complaints to visit a dentist. Mechanical removal of plaque alone is not sufficient for the reduction of gingival inflammation associated with plaque. Mouthwashes are supplemented to it as a homecare product. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite mouthwash on plaque and gingival inflammation and to assess the clinical parameters of gingivitis patients from baseline to 21 days with the use of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite and 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwashes. Materials and Methods: This clinical trial study included 60 patients with gingival inflammation evaluated using clinical parameters such as bleeding on probing index, plaque index, and gingival index at baseline and 21 days. Group A patients were given Hi Wash mouthwash and Group B 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash with 30 patients in each group. Results: The scores for clinical parameters were significantly reduced after 21 days in Group A and Group B patients, and there was a reduction in plaque-associated gingival inflammation without scaling and root planning. Conclusions: 0.2% sodium hypochlorite mouthwash is as effective as 0.2% chlorhexidine for the treatment of gingivitis as it is an adjunct to mechanical plaque removal in terms of safety, less side effects, less staining and can be used as a routine mouthwash.

Keywords: 0. 2% sodium hypochlorite, 0.2% chlorhexidine, gingivitis


How to cite this article:
Mishra R, Chandrashekar KT, Tripathi VD, Hazari A, Sabu BS, Sahu A. Comparative evaluation of efficacy of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite (Hi Wash) mouthwash with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash on plaque-induced gingivitis: A clinical trial. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2019;23:534-8

How to cite this URL:
Mishra R, Chandrashekar KT, Tripathi VD, Hazari A, Sabu BS, Sahu A. Comparative evaluation of efficacy of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite (Hi Wash) mouthwash with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash on plaque-induced gingivitis: A clinical trial. J Indian Soc Periodontol [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Dec 6];23:534-8. Available from: http://www.jisponline.com/text.asp?2019/23/6/534/268612




   Introduction Top


Dental plaque is the biofilm that adheres to the intraoral hard surfaces. It consists of microorganisms, their products, food debris, and epithelial sheddings, which is primarily responsible for biofilm-induced gingivitis and dental caries. If left untreated, gingivitis may progress to periodontitis. Periodontitis may eventually lead to loss of tooth and further discomfort to the patient. To keep up a healthy periodontium, plaque removal is necessary, and there should be a resolution of gingival inflammation.[1] Scaling and root planning is the basic treatment modality for the debridement and reduction in microbial load of plaque biofilm. Various antiseptics and antimicrobials have been tried since ancient times as an adjunct to mechanical debridement. In most cases, gingival inflammation does not subside after mechanical debridement alone[2] and the microbial flora tends to invade the gingival sulcus and pockets soon after mechanical debridement.[3] To prevent this, antiseptic agents in different forms have been advised as an adjunctive therapy and is more effective. These agents can be used as local delivery,[4] mouthwashes, gels, etc.

Chlorhexidine mouthwash is an effective mouthwash against supragingival and subgingival flora.[5] It has both bacteriostatic and bactericidal property at low and high concentrations. It is considered as the gold standard for mouthwash, but it has some disadvantages such as tendency to stain teeth and intraoral restorations if used for long term, it may alter taste sensation, may impair healing as it has some toxicity for gingival fibroblasts[6],[7] and to some lesser extent promotes calculus deposition although it has antiplaque effect.[8]

The sodium hypochlorite has been used for various purposes since ages. It is a well-known bleaching agent for clothes, effective for wound cleaning, and dilute form can be used for bath intermittently in atopic dermatitis.[9] It has broad antimicrobial activity.

In dentistry, 1%–5.25% as a root canal irrigant as it can dissolve organic matter in canal. It possesses some anticaries activity against the cariogenic bacteria within dentinal tubules and also by its antiplaque action.[10],[11] Slot considered dilute form of NaOCl as one of the low-cost antiseptics for periodontal treatment, and he also suggested that it does not corrode intraoral hard surfaces such as teeth and titanium implants. NaOCl was substantive enough to remain for 24 h in the oral cavity.[11] In 1984, “The American Dental Association Council on Dental Therapeutics” assigned 0.1% sodium hypochlorite as “mild antiseptic mouthrinse,” which can be applied directly on oral mucous membranes.[12]

Sodium hypochlorite has a beneficial effect on dental plaque biofilm as well. Supragingival and subgingival plaque biofilm consists of periodontal pathogens embedded in a polysaccharide matrix, renders resistance to attack by antimicrobials through its hard structure preventing penetration and reach microorganism, also deeper layers have different concentration gradient and create an acidic environment preventing further attack.[13] In water, sodium hypochlorite is hydrolyzed into hypochlorous acid and hypochlorite ion. Hypochlorous acid and nascent oxygen are split products of hypochlorous acid having the potential for its action. Hypochlorous acid can diffuse through the cell wall of microorganism and alters its redox potential thereby reduces the capacity of plaque to produce an acidic environment; hence, plaque biofilm is altered or diluted and they no longer possess the capacity to produce gingivitis. Furthermore, it can shift anaerobic to aerobic flora, which is comparatively less pathogenic. It can reduce enzymatic activity, react with proteins, nucleic acid, and lipid molecule of microorganism.[11]

It does not cause toxicity for gingival fibroblasts, so no effect on periodontal healing, no staining, nontoxicity at recommended concentrations, and cost-effective. In humans, sodium hypochlorite is naturally occurring molecule in activated neutrophils, and hence macrophages show no allergic reaction.[14]


   Materials and Methods Top


Study population

The study was conducted in the department of periodontics from September to October 2018. This study included a total of 60 patients of both genders diagnosed with gingivitis selected on the statistical basis of pilot study's result with a power of 80% and allowable error of 5 % through convenient sampling. Study patients included must be >16 years of age, with at least 20 natural teeth, bleeding index >50%, and mild-to-moderate gingivitis. Exclusion criteria were the use of systemic or topical antibiotic therapy within 6 months before the study, pregnancy and lactation, presence of systemic diseases, such as diabetes, blood dyscrasias, human immunodeficiency virus-positive or AIDS, immunosuppressive drug therapy, or use of medications affecting gingival enlargement, should not possess any deleterious habit such as smoking >10 cigarettes a day, and failure to report. Patients were thoroughly explained about the method and principle of the study and informed consent was obtained from each patient.

Study design

The patients were assigned into two groups – Group A and Group B with 30 patients in each group. Group A patients were given 0.2% sodium hypochlorite (Hi Wash) mouthwash and Group B patients were given 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash for 21 days. Clinical parameters such as bleeding on probing by gingival bleeding index (Ainamo and Bay), plaque index (SilnessPand Loe H 1967), and gingival index (Loe H and SilnessP1963) were recorded at baseline and 21 days. Scaling and root planning was done after the trial period of 21 days. Both the groups were advised to use 10 ml mouthwash for 1 min twice daily and asked to avoid eating or brushing for ½ h. Each patient was taught the modified bass tooth brushing technic at the baseline.

Statistical analysis

The data were evaluated for variables tested on bleeding on probing, plaque reduction, and gingival infi‚ammation. All the variables were tested between the two different types of mouthwash on the patients at baseline and 21st day. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied for intragroup comparison at baseline and at 21st day, and Mann–Whitney U-test was applied for comparison between the two Groups A and B.


   Results Top


The mean plaque index, gingival index, and gingival bleeding index were recorded for two different types of mouthwash, namely, 0.2% sodium hypochlorite and 0.2% chlorhexidine. The mean values were obtained prior and 21 days post the use of the mouthwashes and results are enlisted in the tables below.

[Table 1] depicts the comparison of clinical parameters before and after the use of Hi Wash mouthwash. From the statistical results, it was deduced that 0.2% aqueous solution of sodium hypochlorite containing 0.2% sodium hypochlorite mouthwash significantly decreased the amount of plaque, gingival infi‚ammation, and gingival bleeding after the trial period of 21 days with the reduction of plaque index from 1.77 to 0.5. Gingival index was reduced to 1.81–0.62 and a notable difference in gingival bleeding from 93.2% to 33.53%. Mean of NaOCl mouthwash after 21 days is depicted in the [Graph 1].
Table 1: Plaque index, gingival index, and gingival bleeding index at baseline and after 21 days using 0.2% sodium hypochlorite mouthwash

Click here to view



[Table 2] reveals the effect of chlorhexidine on clinical parameters with a significant reduction. PI was reduced to 0.50 from 1.78, and GI was 0.60 after 21 days, and GBI§ was reduced to 33.69 from 94.16 suggesting its efficacy. [Graph 2] shows the mean of chlorhexidine mouthwash after 21 days.
Table 2: The plaque index, gingival index, and gingival bleeding index before and after the use of chlorhexidine at baseline and at 21st day

Click here to view



The intergroup statistical analysis comparing the decrease of PI, GI, and GBI between Hi Wash and 0.2% chlorhexidine is shown in [Table 3]. The average results of both groups were found to be statistically nonsignificant (P > 0.05) suggesting nearly equal efficacy of both the mouthwashes. The clinical parameters and patient follow-up suggested use of 0.2% NaOCl was beneficial in plaque reduction, thereby prevent gingivitis. There were no side effects reported during or after its use apart from its bleach-like taste.
Table 3: Intergroup comparison of clinical parameters between 0.2% sodium hypochlorite and 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash at baseline and after 21 days

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


Oral hygiene practices have been shown interest these days by the general population as a matter of fact that the people are more aware and considerate about their oral health. They try various cleaning aids including mouthwashes. It is a need of this hour to have a mouthwash that can be used on a routine basis with least side effects. 0.2% sodium hypochlorite has shown good results which suggest its use routinely. This mouthwash is a transparent liquid which is palatable with no numbness after its use, and it does not cause dryness as it is alcohol free.

In this clinical study, the use of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite was found to be efficacious, and it could resolve and maintain a healthy gingiva. Sodium hypochlorite (2%–5%) is used as an endodontic irrigant in dentistry which could even remove Enterococcus faecalis bacteria from root canals[13] and evidence support its association with periodontal microbiology, also it can dissolve the organic matter from the pulp chamber.[15] Studies have been done using sodium hypochlorite as mouthwash for gingivitis and periodontitis at different concentrations (0.05%–0.2%).[16]

The main mechanism of antimicrobial activity of NaOCl being its high pH which alters cell membrane of microorganism by irreversible inhibition of enzymes promoted by oxidation and replacement of hydrogen by chlorine ions damages the phospholipid of cell wall and modifies the metabolism of cellular biosynthesis by chloramination. It also alters the plaque composition.[17]

In 1972, Lobene used 0.5% sodium hypochlorite as one of the antiseptic solutions for subgingival irrigation in a water pressure irrigating device and water was taken as control. They selected upper canines and premolars of six college students and compared its efficacy on gingival scores. There was a 47% reduction in the gingival scores compared to water.[18],[19]

Estrela et al., in 2003, compared the antimicrobial efficacy of both 2% sodium hypochlorite and 2% chlorhexidine digluconate using agar diffusion test and direct exposure test on Staphylococcus aureus, E. faecalis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Bacillus subtilis, and Candida albicans. They found that both had equally effective antimicrobial activity on the above-mentioned microorganism.[17]

There was a study conducted by De Nardo et al., in 2011, on 44 male prison inhabitants using 0.05% sodium hypochlorite and distill water as mouthrinse twice daily for 21 days on 20 participants each. They were held back from oral hygiene measures during the study. They were examined for gingival inflammation and found 56% reduction in bleeding on probing in the experimental group after 21 days.[20]

In a study by Galván et al., in 2014, in which there was a reduction in plaque and bleeding after 3 months in participants using 0.25% sodium hypochlorite as a twice weekly oral rinse for 3 months prepared from Clorox than water which was then used as a control.[21]

A review on NaOCl mouthrinse by Rich and Slots, in 2015, based on previous studies found its effectiveness against periodontal pathogens as a versatile antiseptic which is cost-effective and easily available.[22]

In 2016, Jurczyk et al. conducted anin vitro study to compare the activity of 0.95% sodium hypochlorite gel with 0.1% chlorhexidine digluconate solution on periodontopathogens. The minimal inhibitory concentrations of both were <10% in both the groups. NaOCl was the active component of the hypochlorite gel and was more effective against Gram-negative bacteria than chlorhexidine which was more effective against Gram-positive bacteria.[23]

In the above-discussed studies, it is clear that the sodium hypochlorite at different concentrations could reduce the plaque, destroy oral microorganisms, revert the inflammation of the gingiva, thereby maintaining a healthy periodontium. We have used 0.2% sodium hypochlorite as sodium hypochlorite in its dilute form is nontoxic.


   Conclusions Top


On the basis of the results of the study, 0.2% sodium hypochlorite as a mouthwash is nearly effective as 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash for gingivitis. It can be used as an alternate to chlorhexidine-containing mouthwashes and as a regular mouthwash for its low cost and good patient compliance. No adverse reaction or harmful effect and staining were observed in the study participants during the study. The use of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite mouthwash further needs evaluation on large scale population with microbial sampling and long-term follow-up.

Acknowledgement

We hereby, acknowledge our gratitude to S. Goshal (Pansila “m” impact) and Alok Shukla for the provision of the mouthwash sample.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Hellström MK, Ramberg P, Krok L, Lindhe J. The effect of supragingival plaque control on the subgingival microflora in human periodontitis. J Clin Periodontol 1996;23:934-40.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Matesanz-Pérez P, García-Gargallo M, Figuero E, Bascones-Martínez A, Sanz M, Herrera D. A systematic review on the effects of local antimicrobials as adjuncts to subgingival debridement, compared with subgingival debridement alone, in the treatment of chronic periodontitis. J Clin Periodontol 2013;40:227-41.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Magnusson I, Lindhe J, Yoneyama T, Liljenberg B. Recolonization of a subgingival microbiota following scaling in deep pockets. J Clin Periodontol 1984;11:193-207.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Rams TE, Slots J. Local delivery of antimicrobial agents in the periodontal pocket. Periodontol 2000 1996;10:139-59.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Wade WG, Addy M.In vitro activity of a chlorhexidine-containing mouthwash against subgingival bacteria. J Periodontol 1989;60:521-5.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Flötra L, Gjermo P, Rölla G, Waerhaug J. Side effects of chlorhexidine mouth washes. Scand J Dent Res 1971;79:119-25.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Prasanna SV, Lakshamanan R. Characteristics, uses and side effect of chlorhexidine: A review. J Dent Med Sci 2016;15:57-9.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Fairbrother KJ, Heasman PA. Anticalculus agents. J Clin Periodontol 2000;27:285-301.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Ryan C, Shaw RE, Cockerell CJ, Hand S, Ghali FE. Novel sodium hypochlorite cleanser shows clinical response and excellent acceptability in the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Pediatr Dermatol 2013;30:308-15.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Zou L, Shen Y, Li W, Haapasalo M. Penetration of sodium hypochlorite into dentin. J Endod 2010;36:793-6.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Slots J. Low-cost periodontal therapy. Periodontol 2000 2012;60:110-37.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
American Dental Association. Accepted Dental Therapeutics. Chicago, IL: American Dental Association; 1984.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Reyhani MF, Rezagholizadeh Y, Narimani MR, Rezagholizadeh L, Mazani M, Barhaghi MH, et al. Antibacterial effect of different concentrations of sodium hypochlorite on Enterococcus faecalis biofilms in root canals. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects2017;11:215.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Gray MJ, Wholey WY, Jakob U. Bacterial responses to reactive chlorine species. Annu Rev Microbiol 2013;67:141-60.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Abou-Rass M, Oglesby SW. The effects of temperature, concentration, and tissue type on the solvent ability of sodium hypochlorite. J Endod 1981;7:376-7.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Baumgartner JC, Cuenin PR. Efficacy of several concentrations of sodium hypochlorite for root canal irrigation. J Endod 1992;18:605-12.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Estrela C, Ribeiro RG, Estrela CR, Pécora JD, Sousa-Neto MD. Antimicrobial effect of 2% sodium hypochlorite and 2% chlorhexidine tested by different methods. Braz Dent J 2003;14:58-62.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Lobene RR. The effect of a pulsed water pressure cleansing device on oral health. J Periodontol 1969;40:667-70.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Lobene RR, Soparkar PM, Hein JW, Quigley GA. A study of the effects of antiseptic agents and a pulsating irrigating device on plaque and gingivitis. J Periodontol 1972;43:564-8.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
De Nardo R, Chiappe V, Gómez M, Romanelli H, Slots J. Effects of 0.05% sodium hypochlorite oral rinse on supragingival biofilm and gingival inflammation. Int Dent J 2012;62:208-12.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Galván M, Gonzalez S, Cohen CL, Alonaizan FA, Chen CT, Rich SK, et al. Periodontal effects of 0.25% sodium hypochlorite twice-weekly oral rinse. A pilot study. J Periodontal Res 2014;49:696-702.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Rich SK, Slots J. Sodium hypochlorite (dilute chlorine bleach) oral rinse in patient self-care. J West Soc Periodontol Periodontal Abstr 2015;63:99-104.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Jurczyk K, Nietzsche S, Ender C, Sculean A, Eick S.In vitro activity of sodium-hypochlorite gel on bacteria associated with periodontitis. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:2165-73.  Back to cited text no. 23
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
   
 
  Search
 
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
     Introduction
   Materials and Me...
     Results
     Discussion
     Conclusions
    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed168    
    Printed29    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded49    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal