Table 4 Studies of the effect of triclosan dentifrice on oral microorganisms

Jones et al.[8]

0.2% triclosan

• Test = 13 adult females

• 4 mon. washout

• Interproximal plaque and saliva samples

• No detectable shifts in plaque oral ecology

0.5% zinc citrate

• Control = 13 adult females

• 7 mon. use

• Bacterial culture

• No difference between groups in numbers of S. mutans or candida

• 20–50 years of age

• Salivary S. mutans and candida enumerated

• No evidence of increased bacterial resistance to triclosan

• MIC’s by agar dilution

Zambon et al.[9]

0.3% triclosan

• Test = 40 adults

• 6 mon. use

• Supragingival plaque samples

• No unfavorable shifts in plaque bacteria

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• Control = 41 adults

• 6 mon. post-use

• Bacterial culture

• Significant reductions in fusiforms, spirochetes and staphylococci and increases in S. sanguis in triclosan group

• Phase contrast microscopy

• Immunofluorescence microscopy

• MIC’s by agar dilution

Walker et al.[10]

0.3% triclosan

• Test = 70 adults

• 6 mon. use

• Supragingival plaque samples

• No detrimental shifts in plaque bacteria

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• Control = 74 adults

• 6 mon. post-use

• Bacterial culture

• No correlation between triclosan dentifrice and number of triclosan-resistant bacteria, resistant bacterial taxa, or number of subjects harboring tricosan-resistant bacteria

• Phase contrast microscopy

• Immunofluorescence microscopy

• MIC’s by agar dilution

Zambon et al.[11]

0.3% triclosan

• Test = 73 adults

• 6 mon. use

• Supragingival plaque samples

• No unfavorable shifts in plaque bacteria

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• Controls = 71 adults

• 6 mon. post-use

• Bacterial culture

• Higher levels of fusiforms in test group

• Phase contrast microscopy

• Higher levels of neisseria and P. gingivalis-infected

• Immunofluorescence microscopy

subjects in controls

• MIC’s by agar dilution

• Both test and controls subjects exhibited triclosan resistant bacteria

• No evidence for development of triclosan resistance

Rosling et al.[7]

0.3% triclosan

• Test = 20 adults

• 36 mon.

• Subgingival plaque samples

• No detrimental shifts in plaque bacteria

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• Control = 20 adults

• Bacterial culture

• Lower total viable bacterial counts in triclosan group compared to control

• No changes in gingival health-associated bacteria

Fine et al.[12]

0.3% triclosan

• 68 adults

• 6 mon. use

• Supragingival plaque samples

• No detrimental shifts in plaque bacteria

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• 6 mon. post-use

• Bacterial culture

• Decreased spirochetes in triclosan group

• Darkfield microscopy

• No increased proportion of triclosan resistant bacteria

• Immunofluorescence microscopy

• No increase in triclosan MIC’s for Actinomyces viscosus or Veillonella parvula

• MIC’s by agar dilution

Cullinan et al.[6]

0.3% triclosan

• Test = 179 adults

• 5 years

• Subgingival plaque samples

• No overgrowth of A. actinomycetemcomitans, P. intermedia, or P. gingivalis

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• Control = 178 adults

• Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

Sullivan et al.[13]

0.3% triclosan

• 9 adults

• 2 weeks

• Saliva samples

• No major changes in normal oral flora

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• Bacterial culture

• No change in streptococcal susceptibility to triclosan, benzyl-penicillin, gentamycin, erythromycin, tetracycline or fusidic acid

• MIC’s by agar dilution

Cullinan et al.[14]

0.3% triclosan

• Test = 18 adults

• 5 years

• Supra and subgingival interproximal plaque samples

• Triclosan MIC’s similar for isolates from both groups

2% copolymer 0.243% Na fluoride

• Control = 22 adults

• Bacterial culture

• Triclosan dentifrice does not lead to increased MIC’s for oral bacteria

• MIC’s by agar dilution

• Isolates identified by 16S rDNA sequencing