Method: This was a three-arm, modified-crossover in 35 healthy subjects wearing RPDs. Subjects were randomized in the first two periods of crossover to immersion in test product (Polident® cleanser tablet, GSK) or negative control (Water), while in the third period, to positive control (Peridex®, Chlorhexidine-Gluconate 0.12%, Zila). Subjects performed twice-daily treatments to their RPD while brushing natural teeth with toothpaste, having one week wash-out between treatments. Plaque samples were collected from an abutment tooth and RPD prior to study, and 21 days post-treatment. Microbial counts (streptococci, gram-negative anaerobes, yeast) on abutment tooth and RPD surface were evaluated for efficacy. Mixed-model with treatment as fixed effect and subject as random effect was applied to the efficacy parameters. An adjustment for multiple comparisons was performed.
Result: Polident® was superior to Water, (insignificantly different from Peridex®) in counts of target microbial groups (gram-negative anaerobes, oral streptococcus) on RPD proximal surfaces and between adjacent denture teeth surfaces (p<0.0025). There were no statistically significant differences between Polident® and Water or between Polident® and Peridex® for target microbial groups (gram-negative anaerobes and oral streptococcus) on natural abutment teeth. There were also no significant differences between Polident® and Water, nor between Polident® and Peridex®, with regards to log counts for yeast colonization on any sampled sites (p>0.0025), which was attributed to yeast counts being below detection levels (<1000CFU/mL). All regimens were well tolerated
Conclusion: Polident® performed similar to Peridex® in producing lower quantities of bacteria on RPD surfaces (relative to water), but was not significant on abutment tooth surface measures.
Keywords: Bacterial, Microbiology, Prostheses and abutment tooth