The in vitro activity of selected mouthrinses on standard strains of fungi

• Autorzy: Moroz J. , Kurnatowski P.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

An oral cavity hygiene plays a key role in prophylactic and therapeutic measures to prevent pathological changes caused by different viruses, bacteria, fungi and protozoa. It is important to maintain proper oral hygiene and assist the removal of potent pathogens; use of the mouthrinses can be one of method providing to these goal. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of selected mouthrinses on the standard strains of Candida presented in the oral cavity. Eight reference strains of fungi were investigated: C. albicans (CBS 2312), C. albicans (L 45), C. albicans (ATCC 24433), C. dubliniensis (CBS 7987), C. glabrata (CBS 862), C. krusei (CBS 573), C. parapsilosis (CBS 10947) and C. tropicalis (CBS 2424). Thirteen mouthrinses were used in the study, including pure chlorhexidine (CHX), and 12 commercially available varieties: Azulan, Colgate Plax Complete Care Sensitive, Corsodyl 0,2%, Curasept ADS 205, Dentosept, Dentosept A, Eludril Classic, Listerine Total care, Octenidol, Oral-B Pro-Expert Clinic Line, Sylveco and Tinctura salviae. The present study used a qualitative diffusion in agar gel-well plate method to evaluated the antifungal properties of mouthrinses. Among the 12 commercially available mouthrinses examined in the study, the following were not found to show antifungal activity: Azulan, Dentosept, Eludril Classic, Listerine Total care, Tinctura salviae. The largest inhibition zones were produced by Dentosept, Chlorhexidine and Colgate. The smallest inhibition zones were produced by Octenidol and Curasept. With regard to mouthwash type, statistically significant differences in growth inhibition zone diameter were found between the following pairs of fungi: C. albicans and C. krusei for Colgate without dilution and with 1:2 dilution; C. albicans and C. glabrata for Corsodryl without dilution and with 1:2 dilution; C. albicans and C. dubliniensis for Dentosept A without dilution; C. glabrata and C. parapsilosis with 1:2 dilution; C. dubliniensis and C. tropicalis for Sylveco without dilution, 1:2 dilution and 1:4 dilution; C. dubliniensis and C. parapsilosis for Sylveco without dilution, 1:2 dilution and 1:4 dilution. The lowest MIC values calculated from the Iinear regression equation, indicating the strongest potential activity, were obtained for Dentosept A, followed by chlorhexidine; the lowest activity, was calculated for Curasept and for Octenidol. Some of the tested mouthrinses have antimycotic properties at commercially available concentrations. In spite of the fact that chlorhexidine is thought to be the gold standard for mouthrinse use, Dentosept has stronger antimycotic activity and acts on a wider spectrum of fungi species. Chlorhexidine and Colgate do not appear to act against C. tropicalis, neither does Curaspet against C.dubliniensis; therefore, the determination of the fungus species is necessary.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Annals of Parasitology
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: 63
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.331-339,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Moroz J.

• Chair of Biology and Medical Parasitology, Medical University of Lodz, Hallera sq.1, 90-647 Lodz, Poland

autor

Kurnatowski P.

• Chair of Biology and Medical Parasitology, Medical University of Lodz, Hallera sq.1, 90-647 Lodz, Poland

Bibliografia

• [1] Ghannoum M.A., Jurevic R.J., Mukherjee P.K., Cui F., Sikaroodi M., Naqvi A., Gillevet P.M. 2010. Characterization of the oral fungal microbiome (mycobiome) in healthy individuals. PLoS Pathogens 6: e1000713. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000713
• [2] Bednarz W. 2005. Wybrane elementy wspomagającego leczenia chorób przyzębia. e -Dentico 1: 90-94 (in Po lish).
• [3] Tartagila G.M., Kumar S., Fornari C.D., Corti E., Connelly S.T. 2016. Mouthwashes in the 21st century: a narrative review about active molecules and effectiveness on the periodontal outcomes. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery 14: 973-982. doi:10.1080/17425247.2017.1260118
• [4] Kadłubowski R. 1969. Sposoby oceny leków przeciwrzęsistkowych na podstawie krzywej wzrostu populacji rzęsistka. Wiadomości Parazytologiczne 15: 399-401 (in Polish).
• [5] Balagopal S., Arjunkumar R. 2013. Chlorhexidine: the gold standard antiplaque agent. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research 5: 270-274.
• [6] Ronanki S., Kulkarni S., Hemalatha R., Kumar M., Reddy P. 2016. Efficacy of commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses against specific oral microflora. Indian Journal of Dental Research 27: 48-53. doi:10.4103/0970-9290.179816
• [7] Talebi S., Sabokbar A., Riazipour M., Saffari M. 2014. Comparison of the in vitro effect of chemical and herbal mouthwashes on Candida albicans. Jundishapur Journal of Microbiology 7: e12563. https://doi.org/10.5812/jjm.12563
• [8] Eick S., Goltz S., Nietzsche S., Jentsch H., Pfister W. 2011. Efficacy of chlorhexidine digluconate – containing formulations and other mouthrinses against periodontopathogenic microorganisms. Quintessence International 42: 687-700.
• [9] Prasanth M., Capoor A.K. 2013. Antimicrobial effect of mouthwashes: as in vitro study. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology 6: 662-667.
• [10] Rohrer N., Widmer A.F., Waltimo T., Kulik E.M., Weiger R., Filipuzzi-Jenny E., Walter C. 2010. Antimicrobial efficacy of 3 oral antiseptic containing octenidine, polyhexamethylene biguanide, or citroxx: can chlorhexidine be replaced. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 31: 733-739. doi:10.1086/653822
• [11] Mruthyuenjaya R.K., Venugopal S., Sateesh Ch.P., Bannadi D., Renushree B.V. 2016. Antimcrobial efficacy of commercially available mouthrinses: an in vitro study. Journal of Indian Association of Public Health Dentistry 14: 463-468. doi:10.4103/2319-5932.195841
• [12] Fu J., Wei P., Zhao C., He C., Yan Z., Hua H. 2014. In vitro antifungal effect and inhibitory activity on biofilm formation of seven commercial mouth-washes. Oral Diseases 20: 815-820. doi:10.1111/odi.12242
• [13] Radwan-Oczko M., Kedzia A., Michalak A. 2013. Działanie preparatu Dentosept A na grzyby drożdżopodobne [The activity of Dentosept A against yeast-like fungi]. Protetyka Stomatologiczna 63: 262-271(in Polish with summary in English). doi:10.5604/.1132697
• [14] Bugno A., Nicoletti M.A., Almodóvar A.A.B., Pereira T.C., Auricchio M.T. 2007. Antimicrobial efficacy of Curcuma zedoaria extract as assessed by linear regression compared with commercial mouthrinses. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 38: 440-445. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-83822007000300011
• [15] Meiller T.F., Kelley J.I., Jabra-Rizk M.A., DePaola L.G., Baqui A., Falkler W.A. 2001. In vitro studies of the efficacy of antimicrobials against fungi. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology 91: 663-670. https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2001.113550

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17420/ap6304.120