Mouth rinse showdown: can chlorhexidine beat plaque and gingivitis?
NCT ID NCT07351370
First seen Jun 24, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time
Summary
This study tested two daily-use mouth rinses containing chlorhexidine (CHX) plus either hydrogen peroxide or cetylpyridinium chloride against a placebo rinse. Over 3 months, 81 adults used the rinse twice daily alongside normal brushing. Researchers measured plaque buildup, gum inflammation, and tooth staining to see which rinse worked best.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- chlorhexidine mouth rinse with hydrogen peroxide or cetylpyridinium chloride
- What this could lead to
- If effective, these mouth rinses could offer a better option for controlling plaque and gum inflammation when used alongside brushing and flossing.
- What could go wrong
- This is a small, completed Phase 3 trial, so results are final but may not apply to everyone. Tooth staining is a known side effect of chlorhexidine.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Phase 3
Large-scale testing in a bigger group. Usually the last step before a treatment can be approved.
- Participants
-
81 people
The number who actually took part.
- Started
-
Jan 2022
- Finished
-
Jul 2022
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
18 years and older
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Accepted
You do not need to have the condition being studied to take part.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * Adult patients (≥18 years old) * Presence of at least 24 teeth * Presence of teeth #23-13 and #43-33 * Gingival Index (GI) ≤30% (Lindhe, 1981) * No interdental clinical attachment loss (CAL) at ≥2 non-adjacent teeth or buccal/oral CAL ≥3 mm with probing pocket depth (PPD) \>3 mm at ≥2 teeth (Tonetti et al., 2019) * No known allergy to chlorhexidine (CHX), hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂), or cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) * No fixed or removable orthodontic appliances or removable prostheses * No use of systemic antibiotics within the 3 months prior to the study * Non-smokers or light smokers (\<5 cigarettes/day) * Non-pregnant and non-lactating women * Absence of crowns, fixed partial dentures, or class III/IV/V composite restorations covering more than one-third of the crown, and no deep dental caries extending into dentine Exclusion Criteria: * Presented with signs of hypersensitivity, severe irritation, or discomfort during the experimental period * Were not compliant with the experimental protocol
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Chlorhexidine are added.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
NKUA School of Dentistry
Athens, Attica, Greece
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.
- Could a toothbrush and mouthwash cut pneumonia in the elderly?
- Electric flosser may tackle plaque and gum bleeding better than brushing alone
- Braces vs. clear aligners: which is gentler on your gums?
- Gum fluid proteins may hold clues to periodontal disease severity
- Could cleaning the gums protect a transplanted heart?
- Can an electric flosser outperform a manual toothbrush for healthier gums?