Little difference between triclosan and stannous fluoride dentifrices on gingival inflammation.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) in adults ≥17 years of age involving either triclosan or stannous-fluoride-containing dentifrices and self-performed manual brushing with a minimum four' weeks of follow-up were considered.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Study quality was assessed by two reviewers and meta-analysis performed where using fixed or random effects models as appropriate.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs including four unpublished trials from one manufacturer met the criteria.No differences in the gingival index were seen between the two dentifrices [Diff-0.04, 95% confidence interval CI (-0.11; 0.04); P = 0.34]. However the change in the average gingival bleeding score was significantly in favour of SnF [DiffM0.02, 95% CI (0.01; 0.02); P < 0.00001]. Plaque scores demonstrated a statistically significant difference in favour of TCS, according to the Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (Q&H PI; Diff-0.29, 95% CI [-0.45; -0.13]; P = 0.0004), but there was no difference according to Rustogi Modified Navy Plaque Index (RMNPI) [Diff-0.09, 95% CI (-0.01; 0.18); P = 0.07].

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of inconclusive results for the primary outcome variable of gingival health, it can be concluded that there was a minor and most likely clinically insignificant difference between Tcs- and SnF-containing dentifrices. Meta-analysis of plaque score reduction was also inconclusive; whereas TCS was more effective when assessed by the Q&H PI, it was not when scored with the RMNPI.