DrugLib.com — Drug Information Portal

Rx drug information, pharmaceutical research, clinical trials, news, and more

Periogard (Chlorhexidine Gluconate) - Summary

 
 



PERIOGARD SUMMARY

PerioGard®
(Chlorhexidine Gluconate Oral Rinse, 0.12%)

PerioGard (Chlorhexidine Gluconate Oral Rinse, 0.12%) is an oral rinse containing 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate [ N,N ”-bis (4-chlorophenyl)-3,12-diimino-2,4,11,13-tetraazatetradecanediimidamide di- D -gluconate] in a base containing water, 11.6% alcohol, glycerin, PEG-40 sorbitan diisostearate, flavor, sodium saccharin, and FD&C Blue No. 1. PerioGard Oral Rinse is a near-neutral solution (pH range 5-7).

PerioGard Oral Rinse is indicated for use between dental visits as part of a professional program for the treatment of gingivitis as characterized by redness and swelling of the gingivae, including gingival bleeding upon probing. PerioGard Oral Rinse has not been tested among patients with acute necrotizing ulcerative gingivitis (ANUG). For patients having coexisting gingivitis and periodontitis, see PRECAUTIONS.


See all Periogard indications & dosage >>

NEWS HIGHLIGHTS

Published Studies Related to Periogard (Chlorhexidine)

Implant decontamination with 2% chlorhexidine during surgical peri-implantitis treatment: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. [2014]
CONCLUSIONS: The use of a 2% CHX solution for implant surface decontamination

A preliminary comparison of the effect of 0.3% versus 0.2% chlorhexidine mouth rinse on de novo plaque formation: a monocentre randomized double-blind crossover trial. [2013]
CONCLUSION: Chlorhexidine is an effective oral antiseptic. The CHX 0.3% mouth

Chlorhexidine alcohol base mouthrinse versus Chlorhexidine formaldehyde base mouthrinse efficacy on plaque control: double blind, randomized clinical trials. [2013]
0.1% of Formaldehyde (CLX-F)... CONCLUSION: the results of this study showed that rinsing with an alcohol base

Using chlorhexidine varnish to prevent early childhood caries in American Indian children. [2013]
children... CONCLUSIONS: In this population CHX varnish did not reduce the mean NNCS or

Comparison of antibacterial effects of oral rinses chlorhexidine and herbal mouth wash in patients admitted to intensive care unit. [2012]
mouthwashes in intensive care unit patients... CONCLUSION: The herbal mouth wash has significant antibacterial effects against

more studies >>

Clinical Trials Related to Periogard (Chlorhexidine)

Flossing With Chlorhexidine [Completed]
To determine if flossing with a dental floss presoaked in chlorhexidine, an anti-microbial mouth wash, would improve the clinical signs of gingivitis, an inflammation of the gums characterized by red, swollen, bleeding gums. And to determine if applying chlorhexidine via dental floss would result in tooth staining, which is common with chlorhexidine mouthwashes.

Topical Application of Chlorhexidine to the Umbilical Cord for Prevention of Omphalitis and Neonatal Mortality in Rural District of Pakistan [Recruiting]
The investigators hypothesize that application of 4% Chlorhexidine to the cord stump and meticulous hand washing by primary health care providers of newborn infants will reduce the incidence of Omphalitis and thereby Neonatal Mortality as compared to standardized dry cord care.

Chlorhexidine Against Sodium Hypochlorite as Skin Antiseptics [Recruiting]
The physicians have few options for skin antisepsis. Alternatives for common use antiseptics are costly or ineffective. In order to have more options, this study is needed. The investigators want to know if there are differences between the use of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol or 10% sodium hypochlorite.

Chlorhexidine Gel Therapy for Cariogenic Oral Microflora [Recruiting]
The goal of this clinical research study is to find out if 1% chlorhexidine gluconate gel will decrease the amount of bacteria that causes tooth decay. Whether the gel is acceptable to patients will also be studied.

Chlorhexidine Mouthwash and Bacterial Contamination During Endoscopy [Not yet recruiting]
Background:

Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) is a surgical technique that has been rapidly evolving over the last five years. The technique probably has a great potential in surgical gastroenterology, urology and gynaecology.

The technique is based on the idea of minimally invasive surgery. The human organism is affected by a stress response when exposed to surgery. This stress response can be minimized by reducing the size of the openings whereby the surgeon gains access to the organs. This affects how quickly a patient recovers after surgery and can be discharged and resumes daily life and work. The same principal have been responsible for the surgical evolution in the last 15-20 years where many procedures have gone from traditional open operations with large incisions in the abdominal wall to laparoscopic surgery with cameras through small holes in the abdominal wall.

The latest addition to minimal invasive surgery is NOTES. Here the surgeon gains access to the abdominal organs with flexible endoscopes through the body's natural openings i. e. the mouth and stomach. With this technique the surgeon avoids cutting through skin and muscle of the abdominal wall, thus minimizing the surgical stress response. This minimizes postoperative pain, the incidence of incisional hernias, eliminates wound infection, and properly prevents scar tissue formation inside the abdominal cavity which way lead to ileus. The end result is a quicker discharge and a better cosmetic result.

It has been shown in numerous animal studies that NOTES is feasible and in recent years a rapidly increasing number of published patient series.

However, there is a risk of infection associated with accessing the abdominal cavity through a natural body opening, which initially is unclean and can not be disinfected in the same way as the skin of the abdominal wall.

Numerous microbiological pig studies have shown that there is transfer of bacteria from the body opening (i. e. mouth) to the abdominal cavity when performing NOTES, but this contamination have no correlation to infection after surgery, neither in terms of healing or survival.

It is unclear from the literature whether patients should be offered proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy to reduce the acidity of the stomach before NOTES interventions. The rationale has been that such a treatment can make the gastric juices less acidic and thereby reduce the incidence of chemical peritonitis, which can occur when acidic juices flows from the stomach and into the abdominal cavity. It is known however that the acidic environment of the stomach provides a natural barrier for bacteria. Making the gastric juices less acidic could potentially increase the risk of bacterial peritonitis.

It is known that the bacterial content of the stomach is low due the acidic environment but bacteria passed down from the mouth and throat with the endoscope could potentially result in bacterial peritonitis.

That bacteria from the throat can lead to infections due to instrumentation is known from intensive care units. Ventilated patients may risk getting pneumonia with bacteria from the throat. Several studies have shown that using mouthwash with a chlorhexidine solution can reduce the risk of ventilator associated pneumonia.

Hypothesis:

Mouthwash with 10 ml 0,2% chlorhexidine solution before a gastroscopy reduces the bacterial content in cultures taken from the stomach and the endoscope after a gastroscopy.

Simultaneous PPI treatment gives higher bacterial counts in the cultures.

more trials >>

Reports of Suspected Periogard (Chlorhexidine) Side Effects

Cleft Palate (6)Congenital Anomaly (6)Emotional Disorder (6)Cleft LIP (6)Otitis Media Chronic (5)Hydrocele (5)Eustachian Tube Dysfunction (5)Ageusia (2)Weight Decreased (1)Maternal Drugs Affecting Foetus (1)more >>


PATIENT REVIEWS / RATINGS / COMMENTS

Based on a total of 2 ratings/reviews, Periogard has an overall score of 6. The effectiveness score is 6 and the side effect score is 8. The scores are on ten point scale: 10 - best, 1 - worst.
 

Periogard review by 54 year old female patient

  Rating
Overall rating:  
Effectiveness:   Highly Effective
Side effects:   No Side Effects
  
Treatment Info
Condition / reason:   dental surgery
Dosage & duration:   1/2 oz. twice daily (dosage frequency: twice daily) for the period of two weeks
Other conditions:   none
Other drugs taken:   none
  
Reported Results
Benefits:   prevented infection of surgically sewn gums. They cut my gums and pulled them down further over the teeth and added a laboratory grown skin product to make the gum larger. I also used this periogard bottle when they put caps on my teeth, just to prevent infection.
Side effects:   I had no side effects, but was told the product could stain the teeth (which the dentist could alter back to white teeth), however, I wiped my teeth with a wash cloth after swishing with the product.
Comments:   The details were included in the two above sections.

 

Periogard review by 37 year old female patient

  Rating
Overall rating:  
Effectiveness:   Ineffective
Side effects:   Moderate Side Effects
  
Treatment Info
Condition / reason:   periodontal disease
Dosage & duration:   1 ounce (dosage frequency: 2 x per day) for the period of 3 months
Other conditions:   none
Other drugs taken:   periostat
  
Reported Results
Benefits:   None apparent during treatment.
Side effects:   Raised sores in mouth; attempted to mitigate side effect by rinsing only area with deepest periodontal pockets using syringe, continued to get sores localized to irrigated region.
Comments:   Rinsed mouth vigorously with solution, refrained from eating, drinking, brushing, etc for 1/2 hour after use. Used twice per day. After side effects noted, irrigated only some areas of mouth. Discontinued when sores persisted.

See all Periogard reviews / ratings >>

Page last updated: 2014-12-01

-- advertisement -- The American Red Cross
 
Home | About Us | Contact Us | Site usage policy | Privacy policy

All Rights reserved - Copyright DrugLib.com, 2006-2014