ArticleClinical oral investigations2012
Cytogenetic damage induced by mouthrinses formulations in vivo and in vitro.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cytological changes in the oral mucosa after use of a mouth rinse with alcohol. A prospective double blind control study.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2012Trial
- The effects of the use of whitening mouthwash after home bleaching on the color stability and surface hardness of enamel.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Does Mouthwash Use Affect Oral Cancer Risk? A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2025Review
- Development of whitening mouth rinses formulated with mushroom residues and their effect on enamel's physical properties.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2024Article
- Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Chlorhexidine for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia Prevention in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
- Cranberry extract-based formulations for preventing bacterial biofilms.Drug delivery and translational research · 2021Article
- Genomic Instability in Exfoliated Buccal Cells among Cement Warehouse Workers.The international journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2020Article
- Evaluating the potential genotoxicity of phthalates esters (PAEs) in perfumes using in vitro assays.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
- Could formaldehyde induce mutagenic and cytotoxic effects in buccal epithelial cells during anatomy classes?Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2017Article
- Chromosomal damage and apoptosis analysis in exfoliated oral epithelial cells from mouthwash and alcohol users.Genetics and molecular biology · 2014Article
- Genotoxicity in gingival cells of patients undergoing tooth restoration with two different dental composite materials.Clinical oral investigations · 2014Article
- Genotoxic assessment of chlorhexidine mouthwash on exfoliated buccal epithelial cells in chronic gingivitis patients.Journal of Indian Society of PeriodontologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate DNA damage and cellular death in cells exposed to various commercially available mouthrinses: Listerine Cepacol, Plax alcohol free, Periogard, and Plax Whitening. A total of 75 volunteers were included in the search distributed into five groups containing 15 people each for in vivo study. Exfoliated buccal mucosa cells were collected immediately before mouthrinse exposure and after 2 weeks. Furthermore, blood samples were obtained from three healthy donors for in vitro study. The micronucleus test was used to evaluate mutagenicity and cytotoxicity in vivo. The single-cell gel (comet) assay was used to determine DNA damage in vitro. After 2 weeks exposure, Periogard showed 1.8% of micronucleated cells with significant statistical differences (p < 0.05) compared to before exposure (0.27%). Plax Whitening presented high tail moment value (4.5) when compared to negative control (0.6). The addition of all mouthrinses to cells incubated with methyl methanesulfonate did not alter the number of strand breaks in the genetic material. Listerine was able to reduce genetic damage induced by hydrogen peroxide because a decrease of tail moment was noticed. The results of the present study suggest that Periogard and Plax Whitening can induce genetic damage, whereas Listerine is an antioxidant agent. Since DNA damage is considered to be prime mechanism during chemical carcinogenesis, these data may be relevant in risk assessment for protecting human health and preventing carcinogenesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.