Indian Journal of Dental Research

ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Year
: 2016  |  Volume : 27  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 48--53

Efficacy of commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses against specific oral microflora


Susanthi Ronanki1, Suhas Kulkarni1, R Hemalatha2, Manoj Kumar2, Padma Reddy1 
1 Department of Public Health Dentistry, Panineeya Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
2 Department of Microbiology, National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of Medical Research, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

Correspondence Address:
Susanthi Ronanki
Department of Public Health Dentistry, Panineeya Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Hyderabad, Telangana
India

Context: This study evaluates the antimicrobial efficacy of commercially available chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthrinses of different concentrations. Aims: To evaluate and compare the antimicrobial efficacy of commercially available CHX mouthrinses of different concentrations (0.2%, 0.12%, and 0.1%) against specific standard strains of oral microflora at full strength (FS) and 1:1 dilution at 24 h. Settings and Design: Ten commercially available 0.2% (Rexidine, Hexidine, Smilehex, Chlorhex, Hexidale, Hex, Everfresh, and Gargwell), 0.12% (Periogard), and 0.1% (Eludril) CHX mouthrinses were selected to evaluate the efficacy against specific oral microflora using agar well diffusion Method. Materials and Methods: The standard strains of Streptococcus mutans American Type Culture Collection (ATCC 21293), Streptococcus sanguis Microbial Type Culture Collection (MTCC 442), Actinomyces viscosus (ATCC 3268), Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 25923), Streptococcus pyogenes (MTCC 442), and Candida albicans (MTCC 183) were selected. The antimicrobial efficacy was calculated by measuring mean inhibitory zones formed on agar media. Statistical Analysis Used: Independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and Tukey«SQ»s Post hoc analysis were used. Results: Among 0.2% of CHX mouthrinses at FS and 1:1 dilution, hexidine was effective against most of the microorganisms except with S. pyogenes and C. albicans, where Hex and Hexidale were effective, respectively. When the concentration of 0.1% and 0.12% CHX was considered, Eludril was more effective at FS against all except with S. aureus and S. pyogenes which were more sensitive to Periogard at both FS and 1:1 dilution. Conclusions: 0.12% and 0.1% of CHX mouthrinses showed comparable efficacy with 0.2% CHX mouthrinses irrespective of their formulations.


How to cite this article:
Ronanki S, Kulkarni S, Hemalatha R, Kumar M, Reddy P. Efficacy of commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses against specific oral microflora.Indian J Dent Res 2016;27:48-53


How to cite this URL:
Ronanki S, Kulkarni S, Hemalatha R, Kumar M, Reddy P. Efficacy of commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses against specific oral microflora. Indian J Dent Res [serial online] 2016 [cited 2020 Apr 4 ];27:48-53
Available from: http://www.ijdr.in/article.asp?issn=0970-9290;year=2016;volume=27;issue=1;spage=48;epage=53;aulast=Ronanki;type=0