BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Gingivitis and periodontitis are common periodontal diseases that can significantly harm overall oral health, affecting the teeth and their supporting tissues, along with the surrounding anatomical structures, and if left untreated, leading to the total destruction of the alveolar bone and the connective tissues, tooth loss, and other more serious systemic health issues. Numerous studies have shown that propolis can help reduce gum inflammation, inhibit the growth of pathogenic bacteria, and promote tissue regeneration, but with varying degrees of success reported. For this reason, this comprehensive systematic review aims at finding out the truth concerning the efficacy of propolis mouthwashes in treating gingivitis and periodontitis, as its main objective. DATA SOURCES: Research findings from 6 different databases: China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), PubMed®, Europe PMC, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), BioMed Central, and Google Scholar, were retrieved and examined in addition to a manual search in the references lists. STUDY SELECTION AND SYNTHESIS: The PICOS framework was used to select and exclude studies. The focus was on clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effectiveness of propolis-containing mouthwashes in comparison with propolis-free ones for the treatment of gingivitis and periodontitis, employing related periodontal indices. Animal studies, microbiological studies, in-vitro studies, retrospective studies, case-control studies, cohorts, case reports, case series, reviews, letters, editorials, meta-analyses, and non-clinical randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs), all were excluded. A meta-analysis was not performed and data were only studied qualitatively due to the obvious heterogeneity amongst the studies. Data from the selected studies were extracted, and then the revised Cochrane's risk of bias tool (RoB 2.0) was utilised by two of the authors, independently, to evaluate the risk of bias in each study. RESULTS: At first, 151 results were reached, but then after removing duplicates, 99 records remained, and were later screened, assessed, and studied in full details based on the set PICOS criteria. Out of these 99 articles, ten studies were included in this systematic review, encompassing a total of 453 patients with an age range of (13-70) years old. Propolis mouthwashes with different protocols of application were the intervention whereas placebo or the rest of the tested mouthwashes such as, chlorhexidine, sodium fluoride with cetylpyridinium chloride, sterile distilled water, hydrogen peroxide, were the ones to which propolis mouthwashes were compared. Treatment duration extended from 14 days to 3 months and the follow-up period differed from 14 days to 3 months. In general, propolis mouthwashes decreased plaque accumulations and gingival inflammation in gingivitis patients based on the employed indices. On the other hand, the aforementioned tested mouthwashes other than propolis were deemed equally effective or even superior to propolis in some studies. As an overall assessment for the risk of bias, four studies were assigned as having a low risk of bias. Two studies were deemed to have some concerns, while four studies were identified as having a high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the fact that propolis has shown positive effects in terms of controlling gingival and periodontal inflammation especially when used with mechanical methods, studies lack certainty and their power of evidence is low with no agreed gold standards. These conclusions come, for sure, within the limitations of this review, like having substantial variability amongst the included studies and the presence of studies with a high risk of bias. The findings demonstrate that propolis-based mouthwashes showed promising clinical outcomes in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation. However, it is highly recommended to conduct more rigorous trials with patient-reported outcome measures, extended follow-up periods, larger samples sizes, better-designed methodologies, typified propolis use, and with the implementation of similar indices in order to obtain more reliable, conclusive, and generalisable results. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024524523.

• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

A lip cream with special propolis extract GH 2002 at a concentration of 0.5% (199 patients) was tested against aciclovir 5% (198 patients) in the treatment of episodes of herpes labialis under double-blind conditions. Upon inclusion, all patients were in the vesicular phase. Application was five times daily of approximately 0.2 g of cream to the entire upper and lower lip. The primary parameter was the difference in time between groups to complete encrustation or epithelization of the lesions. Secondary endpoints were the course of typical herpes symptoms (pain, burning and itching, tension and swelling), the global assessment of efficacy and the safety of application. The predefined clinical situation was reached after a (median) 3 days with propolis and 4 days with aciclovir (p < 0.0001). Significant differences in favor of propolis were also found for all secondary parameters. No allergic reactions, local irritations or other adverse events occurred.

Unter Doppelblindbedingungen wurde eine Lippencreme mit 0,5 % Propolis-Spezialextrakt GH 2002 (199 Patienten) gegen eine Creme mit 5 % Aciclovir (198 Patienten) bei der Behandlung von Episoden des Herpes labialis getestet. Bei Einschluss waren alle Patienten in der vesikulären Phase. Die Anwendung der Creme erfolgte 5‑mal täglich mit je etwa 0,2 g auf die gesamte Ober- und Unterlippe. Als primärer Endpunkt war der Gruppenunterschied in der Zeit bis zur vollständigen Verkrustung oder Epithelisierung der Läsionen definiert. Sekundäre Endpunkte waren der Verlauf der typischen Herpessymptome (Schmerzen, Brennen und Jucken, Spannung und Schwellung), die Gesamtbewertung der Wirksamkeit und die Anwendungssicherheit. Die vordefinierte klinische Situation wurde unter Propolis nach (im Median) 3 Tagen und mit Aciclovir nach 4 Tagen erreicht (p < 0,0001). Signifikante Unterschiede zugunsten von Propolis zeigten sich auch bei allen sekundären Endpunkten. Es traten weder allergische Reaktionen noch lokale Irritationen oder andere Nebenwirkungen auf.

• Keywords
• Aciclovir, Herpes labialis, Lip sores, Propolis special extract,
• MeSH
• Acyclovir therapeutic use   MeSH
• Antiviral Agents * therapeutic use   MeSH
• Apitherapy methods   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Double-Blind Method MeSH
• Herpes Labialis * drug therapy   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Propolis * therapeutic use   MeSH
• Recurrence MeSH
• Lip MeSH
• Treatment Outcome MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
• Names of Substances
• Acyclovir MeSH
• Antiviral Agents * MeSH
• Propolis * MeSH

Propolis is a natural product that honeybees collect from various plants. It is known for its beneficial pharmacological effects. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of propolis on human sperm motility, mitochondrial respiratory activity, and membrane potential. Semen samples from 10 normozoospermic donors were processed according to the World Health Organization criteria. Propolis effects on the sperm motility and mitochondrial activity parameters were tested in the fresh ejaculate and purified spermatozoa. Propolis preserved progressive motility of spermatozoa in the native semen samples. Oxygen consumption determined in purified permeabilized spermatozoa by high-resolution respirometry in the presence of adenosine diphosphate and substrates of complex I and complex II (state OXPHOSI+II) was significantly increased in the propolis-treated samples. Propolis also increased uncoupled respiration in the presence of rotenone (state ETSII) and complex IV activity, but it did not influence state LEAK induced by oligomycin. Mitochondrial membrane potential was not affected by propolis. This study demonstrates that propolis maintains sperm motility in the native ejaculates and increases activities of mitochondrial respiratory complexes II and IV without affecting mitochondrial membrane potential. The data suggest that propolis improves the total mitochondrial respiratory efficiency in the human spermatozoa in vitro thereby having potential to improve sperm motility.

• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH