Interdental oral hygiene interventions elicit varying compositional microbiome changes in naturally occurring gingivitis: Secondary data analysis from a clinical trial

AIM

To evaluate the effect of different oral irrigators on the sub-gingival microbiome composition in patients with naturally occurring plaque-induced gingivitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sub-gingival plaque was collected from adults participating in a clinical trial assessing the efficacy of oral hygiene with two different oral irrigators (Waterpik Water Flosser [Group 1] and Oral-B Water Flosser [Group 2]) versus dental flossing (Group 3) for microbiome analysis. Plaque samples were reflective of naturally occurring plaque-induced gingivitis at baseline and of gingival health at the endpoint (4 weeks). Clinical measures of gingival inflammation were collected, and the sub-gingival microbiome was analysed by 16S rRNA sequencing to identify amplicon sequence variants.

RESULTS

Oral hygiene instruction with self-performed manual toothbrushing and water-jet irrigation led to significant reductions in inflammation for all groups; both oral irrigators outperformed flossing in bleeding-on-probing reduction (p < .001). Microbiome diversity of sub-gingival plaque remained relatively stable over time, but significant changes were noted in certain taxa, consistent with increases in the relative abundance of commensals and reductions in late colonizers and periodontal pathogens in the water-jet groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduction in gingival inflammation at 4 weeks within the water-jet groups is accompanied by slight but critical changes in microbiome composition. Although biodiversity does not substantially change within 4 weeks during the resolution of naturally induced gingivitis, significant relative increases in commensal early colonizers such as Streptococcus, Veillonella and Fusobacterium were accompanied by a shift towards a less anaerobic microbiota associated with return to health. These changes were contingent upon the type of interdental hygiene, with Group 1 exhibiting more significant alterations in microbiome composition towards a periodontal-health-compatible community.

Efficacy of water flossing on clinical parameters of inflammation and plaque: A 4-week randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The primary prevention of periodontitis is controlling gingivitis daily. The study objective was to compare the efficacy of a pulsating water flosser to a pulsating water flosser infused with air microbubbles on clinical signs of inflammation and plaque.

METHODS

One hundred and five participants were enrolled in this single-blind, single-centre, parallel, 4-week, IRB/IEC-approved clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: water flosser (WF) plus manual toothbrush, water flosser infused with microbubbles of air (MBWF) plus manual toothbrush, or dental floss (DF) plus manual toothbrush. Bleeding on probing (BOP), Modified Gingival Index (MGI) and Rustogi Modification Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) scores were recorded at baseline, 2 and 4 weeks.

RESULTS

All participants completed the study (n = 105). All groups showed a statistically significant reduction for BOP, MGI and RMNPI at 4 weeks (p < 0.05, except DF marginal RMNPI). The WF group showed a statistically significant greater reduction in whole mouth BOP (0.41) compared to MBWF (0.32) and DF (0.19). This was also true for MGI (0.37, 0.30 and 0.20, respectively) and RMNPI (0.13, 0.11 and 0.06, respectively; p < 0.05 for all comparisons). No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that a manual toothbrush and water flosser, with or without microbubbles, is an effective oral care regimen for controlling gingivitis over 4 weeks.

Efficacy of water flossing on clinical parameters of inflammation and plaque: A four-week randomized controlled trial

Purpose The primary prevention of periodontitis is controlling gingivitis daily. The study objective was to compare the efficacy of a pulsating water flosser to a pulsating water flosser infused with air microbubbles on clinical signs of inflammation and plaque.Methods One hundred and five participants were enrolled in this single-blind, single-center, parallel, four-week, IRB/IEC-approved clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: water flosser (WF) plus manual toothbrush, water flosser infused with microbubbles of air (MBWF) plus manual toothbrush, or dental floss (DF) plus manual toothbrush. Bleeding on probing (BOP), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and Rustogi Modification Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) scores were recorded at baseline, 2-weeks, and 4-weeks.Results All participants completed the study (n=105). All groups showed a statistically significant reduction for BOP, MGI, and RMNPI at 4-weeks (p<0.05, except DF marginal RMNPI). The WF group showed a statistically significant greater reduction in whole mouth BOP (0.41) compared to MBWF (0.32) and DF (0.19). This was also true for MGI (0.37, 0.30, and 0.20, respectively) and RMNPI (0.13, 0.11, and 0.06, respectively) (p<0.05 for all comparisons). No adverse events were reported.Conclusion This study demonstrates that a manual toothbrush and water flosser, with or without microbubbles, is an effective oral care regimen for controlling gingivitis over four weeks.

Efficient Removal of Dental Plaque Biofilm from Training Typodont Teeth via Water Flosser

Plaque biofilms play critical roles in the development of dental caries. Mechanical plaque control methods are considered to be most effective for plaque removal, such as brushing teeth or using flosser. Recently, water flosser has been paid much attention. Here, we tested the ability of a water flosser to remove the adhered sucrose and the dental plaque biofilms formed by Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sanguinis, and Actinobacillus viscosus. We found that the residual sucrose concentration was 3.54 mg/mL in the control group, 1.75 mg/mL in the syringe group (simulating the ordinary mouthwash), and 0 mg/mL in water flosser group. In addition, the residual bacterial concentration was 3.6 × 108 CFU/mL in the control group, 1.6 × 107 CFU/mL in the syringe group, and only 5.5 × 105 CFU/mL in the water flosser group. In summary, water flosser is effective for cleaning the teeth, which may have significant potential in preventing dental caries and maintaining oral health.

Effectiveness of a Sonic-Flosser Toothbrush with a Different Size Brush Heads and Manual Toothbrush plus Dental Floss on Plaque, Gingival Bleeding and Inflammation in Adults with Naturally Occurring Gingivitis: A 4-Week Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of three oral hygiene groups: a novel sonic-flosser toothbrush with a compact brush head, a novel sonic-flosser toothbrush with a full size brush head and manual toothbrush plus dental floss on the reduction of gingival bleeding after 4 weeks. Secondarily, the groups were compared on the reduction of gingival inflammation and dental plaque.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and five (n=105) healthy adults were enrolled in this randomized, examiner-blind, three-group, parallel clinical trial. Subjects were assigned to one of three groups: sonic-flosser toothbrush with full size brush head (SFF), sonic-flosser toothbrush with compact brush head (SFC), or manual toothbrush and string floss (MTF). Bleeding on probing (BOP), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) scores were recorded at baseline, 2-weeks, and 4-weeks.

RESULTS

All subjects completed the study. All three groups demonstrated a significant reduction in BOP, MGI and RMNPI from baseline to 4-weeks for all areas recorded (p<0.001), except gingival margin plaque scores for SFF, SFC and MTF (p=0.203, p=0.082, p=0.324 respectively). Both the SFF and SFC groups were statistically more effective than MTF for whole mouth BOP, MGI and RMNPI (p<0.001) and proximal areas (p=0.022 or less). There were no adverse events reported by the subjects or identified by the examiner during the study.

CONCLUSION

The sonic-flosser toothbrush with a full size or compact brush head was statistically and clinically more effective at improving gingival health and reducing plaque than manual toothbrush and dental floss for adults with naturally occurring gingivitis over 4-weeks.

Evaluation of the Addition of a Water Flosser to Manual Brushing on Gingival Health

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare the use of a manual toothbrush plus water flosser to a manual toothbrush alone on clinical signs of inflammation.

METHODS

Seventy-two subjects were randomized into two groups and completed this four-week, single-blind, parallel, clinical trial. Group 1 used a Waterpik®Water Flosser (WF) once daily and brushed with a manual toothbrush twice a day. Group 2 brushed twice a day with a manual toothbrush only (MT). Subjects in group 1 were provided written and verbal instructions for the water flosser and all participants used the toothpaste and manual brush provided, brushing as they normally do. Data were evaluated at baseline (BSL), two weeks (W2), and four weeks (W4) for bleeding on probing (BOP), Modified Gingival Index (MGI), and Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI).

RESULTS

Both groups showed a significant reduction from BSL for BOP, MGI, and RMNPI at W2 and W4, except for MT W2 facial proximal MGI (p = 0.153) and marginal RMNPI (p = 0.324). The WF was significantly more effective than the MT for reducing BOP, MGI, and RMNPI at W2 and W4 for all areas measured. The WF was 3.13 times as effective for reducing BOP, 2.69 times for MGI, and 2.44 times for RMNPI at W4 (p < 0.001) for whole mouth scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of the Waterpik®Water Flosser to manual tooth brushing is significantly more effective for improving gingival health than manual tooth brushing alone.

Comparison of Water Flosser and Interdental Brush on Reduction of Gingival Bleeding and Plaque: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this randomized, two-week, single blind, two-group parallel pilot study was to compare the reduction in gingival bleeding and plaque in subjects using a water flosser or interdental brush, each combined with a manual toothbrush.

METHODS

Twenty-eight subjects completed the study. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Waterpik® Water Flosser (WF) plus manual toothbrush or interdental brushes (IDBs) plus a manual toothbrush. Bleeding on probing (BOP) was measured at six sites and reported for whole mouth, lingual, facial, and interproximal areas. Plaque data were measured using the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) and were reported for whole mouth, approximal, marginal, facial, and lingual areas. Subjects received verbal and written instructions on the use of their interdental product and demonstrated proficiency prior to starting the study.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the groups for BOP or RMNPI at baseline. Both groups demonstrated a significant reduction in BOP and RMNPI for all regions and areas measured from baseline to two weeks. The WF was more effective than the IDBs for BOP whole mouth (56%), facial (44%), approximal whole mouth (53%), and approximal facial (41%). Post hoc power analysis showed that the sample size was not adequate to detect a significant difference between groups for lingual and marginal assessments for BOP or any area for RMNPI.

CONCLUSIONS

The Waterpik Water Flosser is more effective than IDBs for reducing gingival bleeding over two weeks.

Comparison of Water Flosser and Interdental Brush on Plaque Removal: A Single-Use Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this randomized, single-use, single-blind, two-group, parallel pilot study was to compare the plaque removal ability of a water flosser and interdental brush when used in combination with a manual toothbrush.

METHODS

Twenty-eight (28) subjects completed the study. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Waterpik®Water Flosser (WF) plus manual tooth brushing or interdental brushes (IDB) plus manual tooth brushing. Pre-cleaning plaque scores were obtained using the Rustogi Modification of the Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI). Subjects were instructed on the use of their interdental product. Post-cleaning scores were obtained after a supervised brushing and use of the interdental device. Scores were recorded for whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, and lingual regions for each subject.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the groups for pre-cleaning plaque scores for whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, or lingual regions. Both groups showed significant reductions in plaque from baseline for all areas measured (p < 0.001). The WF group was significantly more effective than the IDB group for removing plaque from all areas measured. Specifically, the WF was 18% more effective for whole mouth and marginal areas, 20% for approximal areas, 11% for facial areas, and 29% for lingual areas.

CONCLUSIONS

The Waterpik Water Flosser and manual toothbrush removes significantly more plaque from tooth surfaces (whole mouth, marginal, approximal, facial, and lingual) than interdental brushes and a manual toothbrush after a single use.