Effectiveness of mouthwashes on reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral load in oral cavity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Satisfaction with government recommended pre-procedural mouth rinses in the mitigation of Covid-19 in Hong Kong SAR: A triple blind randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate satisfaction and acceptability with three pre-procedural mouthrinses recommended by the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A triple-blind parallel-arm randomised controlled clinical trial was conducted. Following eligibility assessment, participants were block-randomised to the three intervention pre-procedural mouthrinses groups: Povidone-iodine, Hydrogen Peroxide and Chlorhexidine Digluconate. Participants rinsed with one of the mouthrinses assigned prior to any dental treatment. Participants, operators and assessors were blind to the assigned mouthrinses (triple blind). Satisfaction ratings were assessed on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS) and acceptability of the mouthrinses were determined.

RESULTS

Following clinical screening, 228 participants were involved in the trial. The mean overall VAS satisfaction was 7.35 (SD 1.68). There was no significant difference in VAS satisfaction ratings among the three groups (p>0.05) nor in between groups. Acceptability of the mouthrinses was high with the vast majority (89.5 %, 204) willing to use the mouthrinses again if pre-procedural mouthrinsing is required. There was no significant difference in acceptability ratings (p>0.05). There were some aspects such as taste and smell that participants commented on (on average, 24.6 %, 56), although no significant difference in prevalence of reports among groups (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There were high rates of satisfaction and acceptability of the HKSAR Government recommended pre-procedural mouthrinses for the mitigation of COVID-19 transmission in the dental setting. There was no significant difference in satisfaction and acceptability rates among the three recommended pre-procedural mouthrinses.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The high satisfaction and acceptability rates of the HKSAR Government recommended pre-procedural mouthrinses in the mitigation of COVID-19 in this clinical trial lends support for the HKSAR's policy on pre-procedural mouthrinses in the dental setting and this has implications for practice and policy during pandemics.

Oral mouthwashes for asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic adults with COVID-19 and salivary viral load: a randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Recent randomized clinical trials suggest that the effect of using cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) mouthwashes on the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load in COVID-19 patients has been inconsistent. Additionally, no clinical study has investigated the effectiveness of on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash against COVID-19.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label clinical trial to assess for any effects of using mouthwash on the salivary SARS-CoV-2 viral load among asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic adult COVID-19-positive patients. Patients were randomized to receive either 20 mL of 0.05% CPC, 10 mL of 0.01% on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide, or 20 mL of placebo mouthwash (purified water) in a 1:1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was the cycle threshold (Ct) values employed for SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load estimation. We used linear mixed-effects models to assess for any effect of the mouthwashes on SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load.

RESULTS

Of a total of 96 eligible participants enrolled from November 7, 2022, to January 19, 2023, 90 were accepted for the primary analysis. The use of 0.05% CPC mouthwash was not shown to be superior to placebo in change from baseline salivary Ct value at 30 min (difference vs. placebo, 0.640; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.425 to 2.706; P = 0.543); 2 h (difference vs. placebo, 1.158; 95% CI, -0.797 to 3.112; P = 0.246); 4 h (difference vs. placebo, 1.283; 95% CI, -0.719 to 3.285; P = 0.209); 10 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.304; 95% CI, -1.777 to 2.385; P = 0.775); or 24 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.782; 95% CI, -1.195 to 2.759; P = 0.438). The use of 0.01% on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash was also not shown to be superior to placebo in change from baseline salivary Ct value at 30 min (difference vs. placebo, 0.905; 95% CI, -1.079 to 2.888; P = 0.371); 2 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.709; 95% CI, -1.275 to 2.693; P = 0.483); 4 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.220; 95% CI, -1.787 to 2.226; P = 0.830); 10 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.198; 95% CI, -1.901 to 2.296; P = 0.854); or 24 h (difference vs. placebo, 0.784; 95% CI, -1.236 to 2.804; P = 0.447).

CONCLUSIONS

In asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic adults with COVID-19, compared to placebo, the use of 0.05% CPC and 0.01% on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash did not lead to a significant reduction in SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load. Future studies of the efficacy of CPC and on-demand aqueous chlorine dioxide mouthwash on the viral viability of SARS-CoV-2 should be conducted using different specimen types and in multiple populations and settings.

The effect of preprocedural mouthrinses against COVID-19 before acid etching on the microleakage of a resin-based sealant in permanent molars: An in vitro experimental study

Aim

To determine whether rinsing with preprocedural mouthrinses against coronavirus disease before acid etching affects resin-based sealant microleakage.

Materials and Methods

A presented in vitro experimental study was performed on 15 extracted permanent third molars. Samples were randomly allocated into five groups: Group 1-distilled water (control); Group 2-1% hydrogen peroxide; Group 3-1.5% hydrogen peroxide; Group 4-0.5% povidone-iodine; and Group 5-1% povidone-iodine. After the teeth were immersed in the assigned mouth rinses for 60 s, they were sealed with Concise™ white sealant. Subsequently, the teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles, immersed in 2% methylene blue solution for 24 h, and sectioned with two parallel cuts in the buccolingual direction. Sixty surfaces (12 surfaces in each group) were examined for microleakage under a 40× light microscope and scored as described by Zyskind et al. Welch's one-way analysis of variance test and the Games-Howell test were used to analyze the results at a significance level of P < 0.05 for all tests.

Results

The intergroup comparisons indicated that the 0.5% povidone-iodine group and the 1% povidone-iodine group had significantly higher microleakage compared with the control group. The 1% and 1.5% hydrogen peroxide groups demonstrated no significant difference in mean microleakage scores compared with the control group. There was no significant difference between the povidone groups and the hydrogen peroxide groups.

Conclusions

Preprocedural rinsing with 0.5% and 1% povidone-iodine before acid etching caused higher microleakage of resin-based sealant, while hydrogen peroxide rinsing gave comparable microleakage compared with the control group.

General and orofacial symptoms associated with acute and long COVID in 80- and 90-year-old Swedish COVID-19 survivors

OBJECTIVES

To describe acute and long COVID-19 symptoms among older elderly Swedes and to find predictive factors for the development symptoms associated with acute and long COVID.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A questionnaire about general and oral health was mailed to all 80-year-olds (born 1942, n = 6299) and 90-year-olds (born 1932, n = 1904) in two Swedish counties. Participants reporting COVID-19 were asked to complete an additional questionnaire.

RESULTS

Overall response rate was 66 % (n = 5375). Affirmative responses to having been sick/tested positive for COVID-19 were reported by 577 persons. Response rate to the COVID-19 questionnaire was 49 %. The majority (88 %) reported some general symptoms during the acute stage while 44 % reported orofacial symptom/s. Reporting of any form of long-COVID general symptoms was 37 and 35 % for orofacial symptoms. Predictive factors for contracting COVID-19 (based on self-report from 2017) were living in elderly housing/senior care facility (OR 1.6, CI 1.0-2.3), large number (>10) of weekly social contacts (OR 1.5, CI 1.3-1.9), being married (OR 1.4, CI 1.1-1.7) and high school/university education (OR 1.3 CI 1.1-1-6). The highest odds ratio for general symptoms of long-COVID were a single complete denture (OR 5.0, CI 2.0-12.3), reporting bad breath (OR 3.7, CI 1.9-7.2) and daytime dry mouth (OR 2.2, CI 1.1-4.2). Regarding long-COVID orofacial symptoms, the highest risk factors were bad breath (OR 3.8, CI 1.9-7.5) and a single complete denture in one jaw (OR 3.4, CI 1.2-9.8).

CONCLUSION

Long-COVID general and orofacial symptoms are common among older elderly COVID-19 survivors CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Oral microorganisms may be responsible for development of long-COVID symptoms. Health personnel managing COVID-19 patients should carefully examine dental status, especially in those having acrylic-based removable dentures, for oral signs and symptoms. If found, rigorous oral hygiene procedures should be carried out including cleaning/disinfection of the denture.

Efficacy of different mouthwashes against COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

To evaluate the effectiveness of antiseptic mouthwashes in reducing SARS-CoV-2 load clinically and in vitro. A systematic electronic search (MEDLINE/Scopus/Cochrane) was conducted to identify prospective clinical and in vitro studies published between 2019 included and 16 June 2023 assessing the effectiveness of mouthwashes in reducing SARS-CoV-2 load in saliva or surrogates. Data were summarized in tables and a network meta-analysis was performed for clinical trials. Thirty-five studies (14 RCTs, 21 in vitro) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was judged to be high for 2 clinical and 7 in vitro studies. The most commonly test product was chlorhexidine alone or in combination with other active ingredients, followed by povidone-iodine, hydrogen peroxide and cetylpyridinium chloride. Overall, the descriptive analysis revealed the effectiveness of the mouthwashes in decreasing the salivary viral load both clinically and in vitro. Network meta-analysis demonstrated a high degree of heterogeneity. Among these studies, only chlorhexidine 0.20% was associated to a significant Ct increase in the saliva 5 min after rinsing compared to non-active control (p = 0.027). Data from clinical and in vitro studies suggested the antiviral efficacy of commonly used mouthwashes. Large well-balanced trials are needed to identify the best rinsing protocols.