Trial reportBMC oral health2025
Efficacy of 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthwash containing 0.001% EDTA versus commercially available chlorhexidine mouthwash in minimizing tooth staining: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cuttlefish Ink-Derived Melanin Nanoparticles Enabling NIR-Responsive Electrospun Nanofibrous Mats for On-Demand Selective Antibacterial Disinfection of Orthodontic Braces.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2026Article
- Evaluation of oxygen-releasing mouthwash and chlorhexidine as adjuncts in gingivitis treatment: A randomized controlled trial.Bioinformation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChlorhexidine is the most effective plaque and gingivitis control mouthwash. However, it causes some undesirable adverse effects such as tooth staining, alteration in taste, and oral mucosal irritation. To reduce these side effects while maintaining the properties of the mouthwash, we have developed a new mouthwash formulation. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 0.001% EDTA containing chlorhexidine mouthwash (CHX + EDTA) in minimizing tooth stain forming, compared to the commercially available 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthwash (CHX). Additionally, dental plaque and gingival inflammation were compared between the two mouthwashes.
methodsA double-blind, crossover randomized clinical trial was conducted in 58 healthy participants to compare CHX + EDTA (test group) and CHX (control group). After professional cleaning at baseline, participants were assigned to use a mouthwash twice daily for 14 days, then switched after a 2-week washout. Each participant’s mouth was divided into two sides: one with regular oral hygiene and the other without. The plaque index, gingival index, percentage of sites with bleeding on probing, and staining index were evaluated.
resultsAmong the 58 participants, CHX + EDTA showed significantly less tooth staining than CHX in the extent and intensity of the staining index, on both brushing (1.05 vs. 1.29) and non-brushing sides (1.55 vs. 1.75). Both mouthwashes demonstrated similar efficacy in reducing plaque accumulation and resolving gingival inflammation (p < 0.05).
conclusionsThe 0.001% EDTA containing chlorhexidine mouthwash significantly minimizes tooth staining and is as efficient as chlorhexidine in reducing dental plaque and gingival inflammation.
trial registrationThai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR20240830005) registered on 26 June 2024 (TCTR20240830005).
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.