Rosita Elena Espejo-Carrera, Angel Steven Asmat-Abanto, Marcos Jimmy Carruitero-Honores, José Antonio Caballero-Alvarado
{"title":"Effectiveness of mouthwashes to reduce the SARS-COV-2 load in saliva of adults with diagnosis of COVID-19: Systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Rosita Elena Espejo-Carrera, Angel Steven Asmat-Abanto, Marcos Jimmy Carruitero-Honores, José Antonio Caballero-Alvarado","doi":"10.4317/jced.62196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>COVID-19 still represents a threat to public health. In this sense, antiseptic mouthwashes have been suggested to reduce cross-contamination and community transmission.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of povidone-iodine (PVP-I), cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwashes in reducing SARS-COV-2 viral load in the saliva of adults diagnosed with COVID-19. After the systematic search in five electronic databases, 16 clinical trials published until June 2023 were analyzed. Of these, 6 were included in the meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The standardized mean difference (SMD) was reported with its corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). An overall SMD of 0.51 (95%CI: -0.29 to 1.32; I² = 46.0%; <i>p</i> = 0.047) was found. For CPC, the combined effect found in the studies was not significant (SMD = -0.07; 95%CI: -0.42 to 0.28; I² = 0.0%; <i>p</i> = 0.373); the same occurred for CHX (SMD = 0.50; 95%CI: -43.32 to 44.32; I² = 0.0%; <i>p</i> = 1.000). However, PVP-I showed a more consistent profile with a significant combined effect (SMD = 4.15; 95%CI: 2.11 to 6.18) and negligible heterogeneity (I² = 0.0%; <i>p</i> = 0.908).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings indicate a non-significant effect of mouthwashes on reducing viral load when all types were evaluated together. Separately, only PVP-I showed a significant reduction in viral load with a low level of certainty of evidence, while for CPC and CHX the reduction was not significant, with a low and very low level of certainty of evidence, respectively. <b>Key words:</b>SARS-CoV-2, mouthwashes, povidone-iodine, cetylpyridinium, chlorhexidine.</p>","PeriodicalId":15376,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","volume":"17 1","pages":"e96-e107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11829719/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.62196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: COVID-19 still represents a threat to public health. In this sense, antiseptic mouthwashes have been suggested to reduce cross-contamination and community transmission.
Material and methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of povidone-iodine (PVP-I), cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwashes in reducing SARS-COV-2 viral load in the saliva of adults diagnosed with COVID-19. After the systematic search in five electronic databases, 16 clinical trials published until June 2023 were analyzed. Of these, 6 were included in the meta-analysis.
Results: The standardized mean difference (SMD) was reported with its corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). An overall SMD of 0.51 (95%CI: -0.29 to 1.32; I² = 46.0%; p = 0.047) was found. For CPC, the combined effect found in the studies was not significant (SMD = -0.07; 95%CI: -0.42 to 0.28; I² = 0.0%; p = 0.373); the same occurred for CHX (SMD = 0.50; 95%CI: -43.32 to 44.32; I² = 0.0%; p = 1.000). However, PVP-I showed a more consistent profile with a significant combined effect (SMD = 4.15; 95%CI: 2.11 to 6.18) and negligible heterogeneity (I² = 0.0%; p = 0.908).
Conclusions: The findings indicate a non-significant effect of mouthwashes on reducing viral load when all types were evaluated together. Separately, only PVP-I showed a significant reduction in viral load with a low level of certainty of evidence, while for CPC and CHX the reduction was not significant, with a low and very low level of certainty of evidence, respectively. Key words:SARS-CoV-2, mouthwashes, povidone-iodine, cetylpyridinium, chlorhexidine.
期刊介绍:
Indexed in PUBMED, PubMed Central® (PMC) since 2012 and SCOPUSJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is an Open Access (free access on-line) - http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm. The aim of the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is: - Periodontology - Community and Preventive Dentistry - Esthetic Dentistry - Biomaterials and Bioengineering in Dentistry - Operative Dentistry and Endodontics - Prosthetic Dentistry - Orthodontics - Oral Medicine and Pathology - Odontostomatology for the disabled or special patients - Oral Surgery