Enrico Marchetti*, Stefano Mummolo, Jonathan Di Mattia, Fabio Casalena, Salvatore Di Martino, Antonella Mattei and Giuseppe Marzo
Corresponding author: Enrico Marchetti firstname.lastname@example.org
Trials 2011, 12:262 doi:10.1186/1745-6215-12-262
(2012-03-27 10:36) CVUA Karlsruhe
As it was previously noted, a considerable industry bias in mouthwash-related research
exists . Therefore, it would be interesting to know the sponsor of the study and
if the sponsor was affiliated with any of the mouthwash brands under investigation.
To provide insight into the transferability of the results, data about the composition
of the two mouthwash types under investigation would be important as the composition
is highly variable between brands and types [2,3]. Did the two products have the same
content of essential oils? What kinds of essential oils, which may have different
efficacy dependent on type, were used? At least the manufacturer of the alcohol-containing
products provides different product types with different composition, which one was
it? Would it not have been a better experimental design to use the same formulation
with and without alcohol than to use two commercial types of mouthwash, which may
have additional differences other than the alcohol content? How can the conclusion
that the difference is due to alcohol uphold, when the composition has not been characterized
 Lachenmeier DW: Safety evaluation of topical applications of ethanol on the skin
and inside the oral cavity. J Occup Med Toxicol 2008, 3:26. http://www.occup-med.com/content/3/1/26
 Lachenmeier DW, Keck-Wilhelm A, Sauermann A, Mildau G: Safety assessment of alcohol-containing
mouthwashes and oral rinses. SOFW J 2008, 134:70-78.
 Lachenmeier DW, Gumbel-Mako S, Sohnius EM, Keck-Wilhelm A, Kratz E, Mildau G:
Salivary acetaldehyde increase due to alcohol-containing mouthwash use: a risk factor
for oral cancer. Int J Cancer 2009, 125:730-735.
BioMed Central Ltd unless otherwise stated. Part of Springer Science+Business Media.