Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31579502›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in drug safety2019

Adverse events associated with home use of mouthrinses: a systematic review.

Gianluca M Tartaglia, Santosh Kumar Tadakamadla, Stephen Thaddeus Connelly, Chiarella Sforza, Conchita Martín

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04723446 (Efficacy of Three Antimicrobial Mouthwashes in Reducing SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in the Saliva of Patients Diagnosed With COVID-19), which is not on this map. Cited by 51 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04723446 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy of Three Antimicrobial Mouthwashes in Reducing SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in the Saliva of Patients Diagnosed With COVID-19: A Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorQueen Mary University of LondonRan2021 to 2021Enrolled54ConditionsCovid19, CoronavirusArmsCorsodyl® Alcohol free -0.2 % Chlorhexidine digluconate, Colgate Peroxyl® -1.5% Hydrogen peroxide, Oral-B® Gum & Enamel Care -Cetylpyridinium chloride, No rinsing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Interventions for managing halitosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Are Mouthwashes Really Effective againstJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Gianluca M TartagliaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Functional Anatomy Research Centre (FARC), Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Luigi Mangiagalli 31, Milano, MI 20133, Italy Private Practice, SST Dental Clinic, Via Martiri della Libertà 58, 20090 Segrate, MI, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7062-5143
Santosh Kumar TadakamadlaMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, Australia.
Stephen Thaddeus ConnellySan Francisco Veterans Affairs Health System, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Chiarella SforzaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milano, Italy.
Conchita MartínFacultad de Odontología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor oral hygiene is strongly associated with oral and systemic diseases. Alongside mechanical tooth cleaning, the adjunctive use of mouthrinses has been widely advocated. Although research on the efficacy of various mouthrinse formulations is very active, there are a lack of conclusive data regarding their adverse effects.

methodsWe undertook a systematic review in accordance wih PRISMA guidelines of electronic databases of clinical trials of any duration with daily home use of mouthwashes, presenting clinical and subjective side effects (PROSPERO registration: CRD42016054037).

resultsAfter evaluating 614 titles and abstracts, 154 studies were selected for full-text analysis; 85 final papers were included. Based on the active ingredient in the test product, nine categories were created: cetyl pyridinium chloride, essential oils, chlorhexidine, triclosan, natural products, diclofenac, fluorides, delmopinol, and miscellaneous active substances. Most of the studies were of short duration (less than 6 months) with a defective 'methods' description; the reporting of adverse events often being overlooked. Both local morphological (oral mucosa and dental-crown staining, mucosal lesions) and functional (taste modifications, abnormal oral sensation) alterations were reported. Tooth staining was the most commonly listed adverse event, but it was quantitatively assessed only in a very small number of papers; most studies relied on patient reports. Staining was time associated; the longer the study, the higher its reported incidence and severity.

conclusionsThe reduced report of side effects may partly be due to a lack of an objective measure and lack of general guidelines that demand studies report their adverse events. The most frequently reported adverse effect was teeth staining. As in most studies, the effect was associated with trial duration; clinical trials should be of sufficient duration. New investigations meeting the suggested criteria of a minimal duration of 6 months should be planned.

Indexed as

adverse effectschemical compoundsmouthrinseoral healthoral staining

Identifiers

PMID31579502
PMCPMC6759706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.