Comparison of Halitosis and Bacteria Proliferation between Lingual Orthodontic Patient and General Dental Patient
Yeon-Bum Choi1 , Sang-Hoon Choi2
1 Chois Dental Clinic, Seoul
2 Department of Chemistry Undergraduate, SungkyunkwanUniversity, Suwon, Korea
Purposes: Orthodontic appliances, especially lingual orthodontic appliances are easy to be considered to provoke malodor and increase bacteria by the unique positioning on lingual surfaces of teeth preventing easy access of toothbrush and other hygienic tools. When Dr. Kinya Fujita invented lingual orthodontic appliances, he assured it would be more hygienic than labial appliances.1,2 In order to determine the differences of the malodors of lingual appliance wearing patient (LWP) and non-wearing general patient (NWP), a compact and simple gas chromatography (GC) equipped with indium oxide semiconductor gas sensor (SCS) is used to measure the concentrations of volatile sulfide compounds (VSCs) in mouth air.3,4 Saliva samples of LWPs and NWPs are analyzed by colony forming unit (CFU) counting after incubation and bacteria cultivation. We have assessed the correlations of measurements between LWP and NWP with GC-SCS and bacteria counting.
Materials & Methods: Oral air samples from LWPs and NWPs were analyzed with GC-SCS, which is specific to VSCs, and were compared to each other. Saliva samples were collected from LWPs and NWPs after tooth brushing for 3 minutes and incubated for 48 hours at 37o . The numbers of bacteria were compared to each other. Subsequently, oral air samples and saliva samples of LWPs and NWPs were analyzed to compare the effect of lingual appliance on halitosis and bacteria proliferation in mouth.
Results: There were no specific differences between LWPs and NWPs on VSCs and bacteria proliferations. VSC concentrations determined by GC-SCS (Hydrogen sulfide: LWPs 29.3±6.8, NWPs 37.6±14.3, Methyl mercaptan: LWPs 15.5±2.2, NWPs 17.1±3.8, Dimethyl sulfide LWPs 21.1±9.9, NWPs 14.9±5.7) do not demonstrate specific correlations between halitosis and lingual appliances. Bacteria numbers in 1ml of saliva of LWPs (mean: 1,301×2,000/ml, S.D: ±734×2,000/ml) and of NWPs (mean: 1,420×2,000/ml, S.D: ±825×2,000/ml) do not demonstrate specific correlations between bacterial proliferation and lingual appliances.
Conclusion: Adequate tooth brushing and mouth cleansing can prevent halitosis and bacteria proliferation at LWPs to the level of NWPs in spite of lingual appliances
Key words: LWP, NWP, Halitosis, Gas chromatography, VSC, Bacteria proliferation, CFU
Korean J Lingual Orthod 2016;5(1):32-37
Comentários