The effect of antiseptic oral sprays on dental plaque and gingival inflammation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To review the effectiveness of antiseptic oral sprays on dental plaque and gingival inflammation. METHODS: Three electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of oral sprays on dental plaque and gingival inflammation were included. RESULTS: Among a total of 996 papers, 20 effective studies fulfilled the selection criteria, and 8 studies were suitable for inclusion in meta-analyses. A meta-analysis of four studies using a 0.2% CHX spray intervention, without prophylaxis at baseline, showed reductions in PI (Silness and Löe) and GI (Silness and Löe) scores of 0.64 (95% CI, -0.93 to -0.35) and 0.22 (95% CI, -0.32 to -0.11), respectively. Four studies provided a prophylaxis for subjects prior to study initiation. Two of these four studies used 0.2% CHX. A meta-analysis demonstrated an increase of 0.08 (95% CI, -0.02 to 0.18) in PI (Silness and Löe) scores. Two RCTs compared 0.12% and 0.2% CHX solutions, and a meta-analysis showed increases of 1.71 (95% CI, 1.27 to 2.14) and 1.58 (95% CI, 1.23 to 1.93), respectively, in PI (Quigley and Hein) scores. Of the twelve RCTs not amenable to meta-analysis, eight studies reported significant improvements in PI and GI scores. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence suggests that oral sprays are an acceptable delivery method for chlorhexidine. Further high quality studies are warranted to determine the effectiveness of alternative chemotherapeutic agents delivered via oral sprays on dental plaque and gingival inflammation.