Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) and the use of probiotics on the treatment of halitosis. Fifty-two participants, aged from 18 to 25 years, exhaling sulfhydride (H2S) ≥ 112 ppb were selected. They were allocated into 4 groups (n = 13): Group 1: tongue scraper; Group 2: treated once with aPDT; Group 3: probiotic capsule containing Lactobacillus salivarius WB21 (6.7 x 108 CFU) and xylitol (280mg), 3 times a day after meals, for 14 days; Group 4: treated once with aPDT and with the probiotic capsule for 14 days. Halimetry with gas chromatography (clinical evaluation) and microbiological samples were collected from the dorsum of the tongue before and after aPDT, as well as after 7, 14, and 30 days. The clinical data failed to follow a normal distribution; therefore, comparisons were made using the Kruskal-Wallis test (independent measures) and Friedman ANOVA (dependent measures) followed by appropriate posthoc tests, when necessary. For the microbiological data, seeing as the data failed to follow a normal distribution, the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test was performed with Dunn's post-test. The significance level was α = 0.05. Clinical results (halimetry) showed an immediate significant reduction in halitosis with aPDT (p = 0.0008) and/or tongue scraper (p = 0.0006). Probiotics showed no difference in relation to the initial levels (p = 0.7530). No significant differences were found in the control appointments. The amount of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia, and Treponema denticola were not altered throughout the analysis (p = 0.1616, p = 0.2829 and p = 0.2882, respectively). There was an immediate clinical reduction of halitosis with aPDT and tongue scraping, but there was no reduction in the number of bacteria throughout the study, or differences in the control times, both in the clinical and microbiological results. New clinical trials are necessary to better assess the tested therapies. Clinical Trials NCT03996044.

The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate whether a recently described multi-sensor approach called BIONOTE® is accurate enough to verify the efficacy of treatment of patients with halitosis. A treatment with Lactobacillus brevis (CD2)–containing lozenges, compared with placebo was tested. The BIONOTE® was compared with traditional techniques used to detect halitosis: OralChroma™ and two calibrated odor judges enrolled for the organoleptic assessments. Twenty patients (10 treated and 10 placebo), suffering from active phase halitosis were included in the study. Treatment consisted of Lactobacillus brevis (CD2)—containing lozenges or placebo, 4 tablets/day for 14 days. t0 was before the beginning of the study; t1 was day 7 and t2 was day 14. The effectiveness of treatment was assessed through: (1) Rosenberg score; (2) Winkel tongue coating index (WTCI) anterior and posterior; (2) OralChroma™; (3) the new developed multi-sensor approach, called BIONOTE® (test technique). Only the WTCI anterior revealed statistically significant changes between t0 and t2 data (p = 0.014) in the treated group. Except for the WTCI anterior, all diagnostic methods revealed the lack of effectiveness for halitosis of a 14-days treatment with Lactobacillus brevis (CD2)–containing lozenges. The BIONOTE® multisensor system seems accurate in addition to OralChroma™ to assess the initial condition of halitosis and its mitigation during treatment.

Objective To evaluate the antibacterial effectiveness of a combination of ε-poly-L-lysine (ε-PL), funme peptide (FP) as well as domiphen against oral pathogens, and assess the efficacy of a BOP® mouthwash supplemented with this combination in reducing halitosis and supragingival plaque in a clinical trial. Materials and methods The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of the compound against Fusobacterium nucleatum , Porphyromonas gingivalis , Streptococcus mutans , and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans were determined by the gradient dilution method. Subsequently, the CCK-8 assay was used to detect the toxicity of mouthwash on human gingival fibroblastst, and the effectiveness in reducing halitosis and supragingival plaque of the mouthwash supplemented with the combination was analyzed by a randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled clinical trial. Results The combination exhibited significant inhibitory effects on tested oral pathogens with the MIC < 1.56% (v/v) and the MBC < 3.13% (v/v), and the mouthwash containing this combination did not inhibit the viability of human gingival fibroblasts at the test concentrations. The clinical trial showed that the test group displayed notably lower volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs) at 0, 10, 24 h, and 7 d post-mouthwash ( P  < 0.05), compared with the baseline. After 7 days, the VSC levels of the and control groups were reduced by 50.27% and 32.12%, respectively, and notably cutting severe halitosis by 57.03% in the test group. Additionally, the Plaque Index (PLI) of the test and control group decreased by 54.55% and 8.38%, respectively, and there was a significant difference in PLI between the two groups after 7 days ( P  < 0.01). Conclusions The combination of ε-PL, FP and domiphen demonstrated potent inhibitory and bactericidal effects against the tested oral pathogens, and the newly formulated mouthwash added with the combination exhibited anti-dental plaque and anti-halitosis properties in a clinical trial and was safe. Trial registration The randomized controlled clinical trial was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR2300073816, Date: 21/07/2023).

Key Points Suggests previous halitosis classification systems omit some aetiologies, and their diagnoses hinged on single occasion halitometric and organoleptic findings, which are unreliable. Proposes halitosis diagnosis should focus more on the declarations of the patient and his/her social environment. Suggests the new classification completely covers all possible aetiologies of halitosis. Background There is no universally accepted, precise definition, nor standardisation in terminology and classification of halitosis. Objective To propose a new definition, free from subjective descriptions (faecal, fish odour, etc), one-time sulphide detector readings and organoleptic estimation of odour levels, and excludes temporary exogenous odours (for example, from dietary sources). Some terms previously used in the literature are revised. Results A new aetiologic classification is proposed, dividing pathologic halitosis into Type 1 (oral), Type 2 (airway), Type 3 (gastroesophageal), Type 4 (blood-borne) and Type 5 (subjective). In reality, any halitosis complaint is potentially the sum of these types in any combination, superimposed on the Type 0 (physiologic odour) present in health. Conclusion This system allows for multiple diagnoses in the same patient, reflecting the multifactorial nature of the complaint. It represents the most accurate model to understand halitosis and forms an efficient and logical basis for clinical management of the complaint.

OBJECTIVES: The objective is to evaluate the association of Solobacterium moorei (S. moorei) to halitosis and to also check for the effects of two different mouth rinses on levels of S. moorei in saliva and tongue coating and its impact on oral halitosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a placebo-controlled parallel study of 160 individuals who were randomized and the study was performed using double-blinded protocol. Enrolled individuals filled a structured questionnaire regarding demographic data, oral hygiene habits, and dietary habits. Full mouth organoleptic odor scores (OLR), volatile sulfur compounds levels, Miyazaki's tongue coating index, and Plaque scores were recorded before intervention (baseline) and after 1-week post treatment. Microbiological samples obtained from the tongue and saliva was investigated for S. moorei levels using real time polymerase chain reaction. Participants were randomly assigned for two test mouth rinses (Melaleuca alternifolia and Chlorhexidine) and placebo groups. RESULTS: All salivary and tongue coating samples were tested positive for S. moorei in the halitosis group. One week post-treatment S. moorei counts in saliva and tongue coating samples of test group showed a significant reduction at P < 0.001. Paired t-test results showed that Melaleuca alternifolia was comparable with chlorhexidine in reduction of OLR, and VSC scores (P < 0.001). Salivary levels of S. moorei in Melaleuca alternifolia group showed a higher reduction (5.67 log10 copies/mL) than chlorhexidine group (5.1log10 copies/mL). CONCLUSION: S. moorei showed a positive correlation with oral halitosis scores. Both Melaleuca alternifolia and chlorhexidine were equally effective in reducing S. moorei levels and halitosis score.

Accumulating evidence indicates that microbiota plays a critical role in physiological processes in humans. However, it might also contribute to body malodor by producing numerous odorous molecules such as ammonia, volatile sulfur compounds or trimethylamine. Although malodor is commonly overlooked by physicians, it constitutes a major problem for many otherwise healthy people. Thus, this review aims to investigate most common causes of malodor and describe potential therapeutic options. We searched PUBMED and Google Scholar databases to identify the clinical and pre-clinical studies on bad body smell, malodor, halitosis and microbiota. Unpleasant smell might originate from the mouth, skin, urine or reproductive fluids and is usually caused by odorants that are produced by resident bacterial flora. The accumulation of odorous compounds might result from diet, specific composition of microbiota, as well as compromised function of the liver, intestines and kidneys. Evidence-based guidelines for management of body malodor are lacking and no universal treatment exists. However, the alleviation of the symptoms may be achieved by controlling the diet and physical elimination of bacteria and/or accumulated odorants.

Halitosis ist ein für die Betroffenen sehr belastendes Symptom. Orale Ursachen wie Karies sind führend und können teils behoben werden. Für den Rest der Patienten stellt sich die Frage nach einer wirksamen oralen Therapie. Eine Studie verglich nun zwei Standardmittel mit einem pflanzlichen Extrakt.

Halitosis, bad breath or oral malodour are all synonyms for the same pathology. Halitosis has a large social and economic impact. For the majority of patients suffering from bad breath, it causes embarrassment and affects their social communication and life. Moreover, halitosis can be indicative of underlying diseases. Only a limited number of scientific publications were presented in this field until 1995. Ever since, a large amount of research is published, often with lack of evidence. In general, intraoral conditions, like insufficient dental hygiene, periodontitis or tongue coating are considered to be the most important cause （85%） for halitosis. Therefore, dentists and periodontologists are the first-line professionals to be confronted with this problem. They should be well aware of the origin, the detection and especially of the treatment of this pathology. In addition, ear-nose-throat-associated （10%） or gastrointestinal/ endocrinological （5%） disorders may contribute to the problem. In the case of halitophobia, psychiatrical or psychological problems may be present. Bad breath needs a multidisciplinary team approach： dentists, periodontologists, specialists in family medicine, ear- nose-throat surgeons, internal medicine and psychiatry need to be updated in this field, which still is surrounded by a large taboo. Multidisciplinary bad breath clinics offer the best environment to examine and treat this pathology that affects around 25% of the whole population. This article describes the origin, detection and treatment of halitosis, regarded from the different etiological origins.

IntroductionHalitosis is a term that defines any unpleasant odour smell originating from the oral cavity and may have a local or systemic origin. This project aims to determine the effectiveness of treatment involving antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) combined with treatment using probiotics at reducing halitosis.Methods and analysis92 individuals from 18 to 60 years of age with a diagnosis of halitosis (sulfide≥112 ppb, gas chromatography) will be selected. The participants will be randomly allocated to four groups (n=23). Group 1 (control): brushing, dental floss and tongue scraper; group 2: brushing, dental floss, tongue scraper and aPDT with blue Light Emitting Diode (LED) +annatto; group 3: brushing, dental floss, tongue scraper and aPDT with blue Light Emitting Diode (LED) +annatto and probiotic lozenges containing Streptococcus salivarius K12 (BLIS K12); and group 4: brushing, dental floss, tongue scraper and probiotic lozenges containing S. salivarius K12 (BLIS K12). Comparisons will be made of the respiratory analysis results before and immediately after the first treatment session, at the end of the 30-day treatment period and again 60 days after the treatment initiation. Microbiological analysis (counts of colony-forming units of viable bacteria from coated tongue) will be performed at the same time. The microbiome analysis will be conducted before treatment, 30 days after treatment completion and 60 days after treatment initiation, following DNA extraction. All groups will receive oral hygiene instructions as well as brushes, toothpaste and dental floss. Data normality will be checked using Shapiro-Wilk test. In the case of normality, analysis of variance is used for the comparisons. In the case of non-parametric data, Kruskal-Wallis test will be used. Wilcoxon test will be used to analyse the results of each treatment between two assessment times.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Nove de Julho University (certificate number: 82830524.6.0000.5511; approval date: 2 October 2024). Participants will agree to take part in the study by signing an informed consent form. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The collected data will be available in the OSF data repository.Trial registration numberNCT06583720.

Human axillary malodor negatively influences impression-related appearance, confidence, and hygiene, and ultimately decreases quality of life. Malodor formation involves three steps: vesiculation of odorless precursors within the human body, influx of these precursors into the intracellular space of bacteria, such as Corynebacterium striatum and Staphylococcus hominis, and efflux of malodorous metabolites into the axilla after conversion by axillary malodor-releasing enzymes (AMREs). Malodor deodorants are currently in use, and their formulation strategies, based on the ingredients, can be classified as follows: anti-sweating, antiproliferation of malodor-forming bacteria, masking (neutralizing) effects against malodor, and deodorization. However, current deodorants have several adverse effects. To reduce such effects while enhancing malodor suppression, a strategy targeting the specific step in malodor formation should be developed, such as the use of ABCC11 pump inhibitors, specific bacterial active pump controllers, and AMRE blockers.