Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEllis, Stephanie
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-08T21:10:57Z
dc.date.available2021-07-08T21:10:57Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citation

Ellis, S. (2021) ‘The effect of chlorhexidine mouthwash vs propolis mouthwash on the nitrate-reducing activity of oral bacteria and vascular control in healthy individuals’, The Plymouth Student Scientist, 14(1), pp. 1-13.

en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/17340
dc.description.abstract

Nitrate and nitrite molecules are involved in the synthesis of nitric oxide (NO), a gaseous vasodilatory molecule, via the nitrate-nitrite-NO pathway. Oral bacteria are responsible for the reduction of nitrate to nitrite making them important regulators in NO production and vascular control. This paper aimed to investigate whether a laboratory-made propolis mouthwash maintained the oral nitrate reducing capacity (ONRC) of commensal bacteria compared with a chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwash and the effects of this on vascular function in healthy individuals. Twenty-eight healthy participants visited the laboratory on two occasions where anthropometric, ONRC, blood pressure and vascular function data were collected. Between laboratory visits a CHX mouthwash or a propolis mouthwash were used for seven days, twice-daily. It was found that propolis mouthwash used for seven days maintained the ONRC of commensal bacteria in healthy individuals (pre; 343.4 ±251.8μM vs post; 331.9 ±225.1μM, p=0.71) and that CHX mouthwash significantly abolished this activity, lowering levels by 67.7% in seven days (pre; 399.7 ±356.4μM vs post; 129.1 ±171.3μM, p<0.001). No significant changes in blood pressure or vascular function were seen following mouthwash use despite bacterial changes. It is unclear whether these insignificant findings are down to methodological issues or external physiological pathways. It was concluded that propolis mouthwash and CHX mouthwash affect the ONRC of commensal bacteria differently. Propolis mouthwash seems to preserve the ONRC therefore is less detrimental to the oral microbiome than CHX mouthwash suggesting potential uses in dentistry and as a therapeutic for hypertensive individuals.

en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Plymouthen_US
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectpropolis mouthwashen_US
dc.subjectchlorhexidine mouthwashen_US
dc.subjectchlorhexidineen_US
dc.subjectoral bacteriaen_US
dc.subjectoral nitrate reducing capacityen_US
dc.subjectvascular controlen_US
dc.titleThe effect of chlorhexidine mouthwash vs propolis mouthwash on the nitrate-reducing activity of oral bacteria and vascular control in healthy individualsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
plymouth.issue1
plymouth.volume14
plymouth.journalThe Plymouth Student Scientist


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 3.0 United States

All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV