Cargando…

Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production

OBJECTIVES: Our purpose was to determine the antibacterial properties of propolis and to evaluate its use as an antibacterial mouthwash with minimal complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental laboratory study, an alcoholic propolis extract was prepared. The minimum inhibitory concent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nazeri, Rahman, Ghaiour, Marzieh, Abbasi, Shima
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778618/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31608331
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/fid.v16i1.1103
_version_ 1783456792796200960
author Nazeri, Rahman
Ghaiour, Marzieh
Abbasi, Shima
author_facet Nazeri, Rahman
Ghaiour, Marzieh
Abbasi, Shima
author_sort Nazeri, Rahman
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Our purpose was to determine the antibacterial properties of propolis and to evaluate its use as an antibacterial mouthwash with minimal complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental laboratory study, an alcoholic propolis extract was prepared. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was calculated for four bacterial species including Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans), Lactobacillus acidophilus (L. acidophilus), and Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) using agar dilution. According to the MIC, a propolis antibacterial mouthwash was produced and compared to water, chlorhexidine (CHX), and Listerine using laboratory rats for clinical examination. Salivary specimens of rats were collected at 12 hours, 1 week, and 2 weeks after using the mouthwash and examined by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and repeated measures ANOVA (α=0.05). RESULTS: The results of agar dilution by the number of colony-forming units showed the lowest MIC for S. aureus and the highest for L. acidophilus. Our RT-PCR findings indicated that water alone had no effect on the level of oral bacteria. Propolis mouthwash showed a significant difference with CHX and Listerine (P<0.05) in terms of the number of S. mutans, E. faecalis, and L. acidophilus colonies, while CHX and Listerine were less efficient. There was no significant difference between CHX and propolis (P=0.110) regarding S. aureus colonies, but Listerine had a lower efficacy than either (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: According to the results, propolis mouthwash was more efficient against the studied oral bacteria compared to CHX and Listerine.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6778618
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67786182019-10-11 Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production Nazeri, Rahman Ghaiour, Marzieh Abbasi, Shima Front Dent Original Article OBJECTIVES: Our purpose was to determine the antibacterial properties of propolis and to evaluate its use as an antibacterial mouthwash with minimal complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental laboratory study, an alcoholic propolis extract was prepared. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was calculated for four bacterial species including Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans), Lactobacillus acidophilus (L. acidophilus), and Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) using agar dilution. According to the MIC, a propolis antibacterial mouthwash was produced and compared to water, chlorhexidine (CHX), and Listerine using laboratory rats for clinical examination. Salivary specimens of rats were collected at 12 hours, 1 week, and 2 weeks after using the mouthwash and examined by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and repeated measures ANOVA (α=0.05). RESULTS: The results of agar dilution by the number of colony-forming units showed the lowest MIC for S. aureus and the highest for L. acidophilus. Our RT-PCR findings indicated that water alone had no effect on the level of oral bacteria. Propolis mouthwash showed a significant difference with CHX and Listerine (P<0.05) in terms of the number of S. mutans, E. faecalis, and L. acidophilus colonies, while CHX and Listerine were less efficient. There was no significant difference between CHX and propolis (P=0.110) regarding S. aureus colonies, but Listerine had a lower efficacy than either (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: According to the results, propolis mouthwash was more efficient against the studied oral bacteria compared to CHX and Listerine. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2019 2019-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6778618/ /pubmed/31608331 http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/fid.v16i1.1103 Text en Copyright© Dental Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences This work is published as an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4). Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Nazeri, Rahman
Ghaiour, Marzieh
Abbasi, Shima
Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production
title Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production
title_full Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production
title_fullStr Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production
title_short Evaluation of Antibacterial Effect of Propolis and its Application in Mouthwash Production
title_sort evaluation of antibacterial effect of propolis and its application in mouthwash production
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778618/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31608331
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/fid.v16i1.1103
work_keys_str_mv AT nazerirahman evaluationofantibacterialeffectofpropolisanditsapplicationinmouthwashproduction
AT ghaiourmarzieh evaluationofantibacterialeffectofpropolisanditsapplicationinmouthwashproduction
AT abbasishima evaluationofantibacterialeffectofpropolisanditsapplicationinmouthwashproduction