Trial reportClinical oral investigations2019
N-acetyl cysteine versus chlorhexidine mouthwashes in prevention and treatment of experimental gingivitis: a randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- N-acetylcysteine mouthwash for prevention of oral mucositis in hematopoietic cell transplant recipients: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Trial
- Investigating the effectiveness of N-acetyl cysteine mouthwash in preventing chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis: a randomized, double-blind controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Review
- Subgingival microbiome of experimental gingivitis: shifts associated with the use of chlorhexidine andJournal of oral microbiology · 2019Article
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 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the efficacy of N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) mouthwash with chlorhexidine (CHX) in prevention and treatment of experimental gingivitis MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty subjects were assigned randomly and blindly into one of three equal groups: NAC, CHX, or placebo group. The study was conducted in two stages: preventive and treatment substudies. Professional prophylaxis was performed ahead of starting the preventive substudy. Then, the subjects were instructed to stop oral hygiene practices and begin rinsing twice/day with 15 ml of the assigned mouthwash (1.25% NAC, 0.2% CHX, or inert base). Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and papillary bleeding index (PBI) were measured at baseline, 7, 14, and 21 days. The treatment substudy started on day 21 in which the subjects in the placebo group (now with established experimental gingivitis) were assigned to NAC (n = 10) or CHX (n = 10); the abovementioned indices were measured at 28 and 35 days. Efficacy of these interventions was compared.
resultsAll groups accumulated plaque and developed some degree of gingivitis: full-blown in the placebo group and remarkably mild in the CHX group. NAC had slight preventive properties at days 14 and 21. In the treatment substudy, CHX was associated with remarkable reduction in plaque and gingivitis while NAC resulted in insignificant reductions.
conclusions1.25% NAC is marginally effective in prevention and treatment of experimental gingivitis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: When compared with the placebo, NAC showed promising preventive and treatment effects of gingivitis that deserve further development and studies.
trial registrationISRCTN31352091.
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.