-
BMC Oral Health Jul 2023The risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission is relatively high during dental procedures. A study was conducted to investigate the effects of mouthwashes on SARS-COV-2 viral load... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission is relatively high during dental procedures. A study was conducted to investigate the effects of mouthwashes on SARS-COV-2 viral load reduction in the oral cavity.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library for relevant studies up to 20 July, 2022. Randomized and non-randomized clinical trial and quasi-experimental studies evaluating patients with Covid-19 infection (patients) who used mouthwashes (intervention) compared to the same patients before using the mouthwash (comparison) for reducing the SARS-COV-2 load or increasing the cycle threshold (Ct) value (outcome) were searched according to PICO components. Three independent reviewers conducted literature screening and data extraction. The Modified Downs and Black checklist was used for quality assessment. A meta-analysis was performed with a random effects model in the Revman 5.4.1software using the mean difference (MD) of cycle threshold (Ct) values.
RESULTS
Of 1653 articles, 9 with a high methodological quality were included. A meta-analysis indicated that 1% Povidone-iodine (PVP-I) was an effective mouthwash for reducing the SARS-COV-2 viral load [MD 3.61 (95% confidence interval 1.03, 6.19)]. Cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) [MD 0.61 (95% confidence interval -1.03, 2.25)] and Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) [MD -0.04 95% confidence interval (-1.20, 1.12)] were not effective against SARS-COV-2.
CONCLUSION
Using mouthwashes containing PVP-I may be recommended for reducing the SARS-COV-2 viral load in the oral cavity of patients before and during dental procedures, while the evidence is not sufficient for such effects for CPC and CHX-containing mouthwashes.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Mouth; Mouthwashes; Povidone-Iodine; SARS-CoV-2; Viral Load; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37400836
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03126-4 -
The Saudi Dental Journal Mar 2022This systematic review aimed to evaluate the antiviral effect of mouthwashes against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to evaluate the antiviral effect of mouthwashes against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, LILACS, ProQuest, and Google Scholar, and was complemented by a manual search. Both clinical and studies that focused on the antiviral effect of mouthwashes against SARS-CoV-2 were included. Risk of bias assessment was performed only on the clinical studies using the RoB-2 and ROBINS-I tools.
RESULTS
A total of 907 records were found; after initial selection by title and abstract, 33 full-text articles were selected to be evaluated for eligibility. Finally, a total of 27 studies were included for the qualitative synthesis, including 16 studies and 11 clinical trials. Antiviral effects were evaluated separately for the and clinical studies. In vitro studies included mouthwashes containing hydrogen peroxide, chlorhexidine digluconate, povidone-iodine, essential oils, cetylpyridinium chloride, and other compounds; studies included mouthwashes containing hydrogen peroxide, chlorhexidine digluconate, povidone-iodine, cetylpyridinium chloride, essential oils, chlorine dioxide, β-cyclodextrin-citrox, and sorbitol with xylitol. Povidone-iodine, cetylpyridinium chloride, and essential oils were effective , while hydrogen peroxide, chlorhexidine digluconate, povidone-iodine, cetylpyridinium chloride, β-cyclodextrin-citrox, and sorbitol with xylitol were effective . Unclear or high risk of bias was found for almost all clinical studies, and only one study presented with a low risk of bias. No further quantitative analysis was performed.
CONCLUSION
Although povidone-iodine, cetylpyridinium chloride, and essential oils may be an alternative to reduce the viral load and , more studies are needed to determine the real antiviral effect of these different mouthwashes against SARS-CoV-2.This work was not funded. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (identification number: CRD42021236134).
PubMed: 35125835
DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2022.01.006 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Dec 2023To assess whether in animals or patients with ≥ 1 tooth extracted, hyaluronic acid (HyA) application results in superior healing and/or improved complication... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether in animals or patients with ≥ 1 tooth extracted, hyaluronic acid (HyA) application results in superior healing and/or improved complication management compared to any other treatment or no treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Three databases were searched until April 2022. The most relevant eligibility criteria were (1) local application of HyA as adjunct to tooth extraction or as treatment of alveolar osteitis, and (2) reporting of clinical, radiographic, histological, or patient-reported data. New bone formation and/or quality were considered main outcome parameters in preclinical studies, while pain, swelling, and trismus were defined as main outcome parameters in clinical studies.
RESULTS
Five preclinical and 22 clinical studies (1062 patients at final evaluation) were included. In preclinical trials, HyA was applied into the extraction socket. Although a positive effect of HyA was seen in all individual studies on bone formation, this effect was not confirmed by meta-analysis. In clinical studies, HyA was applied into the extraction socket or used as spray or mouthwash. HyA application after non-surgical extraction of normally erupted teeth may have a positive effect on soft tissue healing. Based on meta-analyses, HyA application after surgical removal of lower third molars (LM3) resulted in significant reduction in pain perception 7 days postoperatively compared to either no additional wound manipulation or the application of a placebo/carrier. Early post-operative pain, trismus, and extent of swelling were unaffected.
CONCLUSIONS
HyA application may have a positive effect in pain reduction after LM3 removal, but not after extraction of normally erupted teeth.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
HyA application may have a positive effect in pain reduction after surgical LM3 removal, but it does not seem to have any impact on other complications or after extraction of normally erupted teeth. Furthermore, it seems not to reduce post-extraction alveolar ridge modeling, even though preclinical studies show enhanced bone formation.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Tooth Socket; Hyaluronic Acid; Trismus; Dry Socket; Tooth Extraction; Molar, Third; Pain
PubMed: 37963982
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05227-4 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Aug 2022WHO and the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommend alcoholic chlorhexidine skin preparation and triclosan-coated sutures to prevent surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Alcoholic chlorhexidine skin preparation or triclosan-coated sutures to reduce surgical site infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality randomised controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
WHO and the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommend alcoholic chlorhexidine skin preparation and triclosan-coated sutures to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing meta-analyses that include studies at high risk of bias, combined with the recent publication of large, randomised trials, justify an updated meta-analysis of high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to test the rates of SSI according to skin preparation solutions (ie, alcoholic chlorhexidine vs aqueous povidone-iodine) and types of sutures (ie, coated vs uncoated).
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library databases, with no language restrictions, to identify high-quality RCTs testing either alcoholic chlorhexidine skin preparation (vs aqueous povidone-iodine) or triclosan-coated sutures (vs uncoated sutures), or both, published from database inception to Sept 1, 2021. Patients who received clean-contaminated, contaminated, or dirty surgery were included. We predefined the characteristics of a high-quality trial through an expert consensus process to develop an enhanced Cochrane risk of bias-2 tool specifically for RCTs with a primary outcome of SSI. Data were extracted from published reports. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model and heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistic. This systematic review and meta-analysis was prospectively registered in PROSPERO, CRD42021267220.
FINDINGS
Of 942 studies identified, 933 were excluded. Four high-quality RCTs (n=7467 patients) were included that tested alcoholic chlorhexidine. No significant difference in SSI rates was noted between alcoholic chlorhexidine and aqueous povidone-iodine (17·9% [667 of 3723 patients] vs 19·8% [740 of 3744 patients]; odds ratio 0·84 [95% CI 0·65-1·06]; p=0·21, I=53·1%). Five high-quality RCTs were included that tested triclosan-coated sutures (n=8619 patients), with no significant difference noted between triclosan-coated and uncoated sutures (16·8% [733 of 4360 patients] vs 18·4% [784 of 4259 patients]; OR 0·90 [95% CI 0·74-1·09]; p=0·29, I=36·4%).
INTERPRETATION
Contrary to previous meta-analyses, this study did not show a benefit from either alcoholic chlorhexidine skin preparation or triclosan-coated sutures, both of which are more expensive than other readily available alternatives. Global and national guidance should be reconsidered to remove recommendations for their routine use.
FUNDING
National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Global Health Research Unit.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Wound Infection; Sutures; Triclosan
PubMed: 35644158
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(22)00133-5 -
International Journal of Dentistry 2023To critically evaluate the available literature and conduct a systematic review of recent randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of probiotics compared... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To critically evaluate the available literature and conduct a systematic review of recent randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of probiotics compared to chlorhexidine mouthwash in enhancing periodontal health.
METHODS
Five databases were searched electronically, as well as the gray literature. Using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized clinical trials, the risk of bias was examined. The weighted mean difference (WMD) method was used to calculate the effect sizes. Heterogeneity was assessed using and statistics. The GRADE approach was adopted to assess the certainty of the evidence. To assess the robustness of the findings, sensitivity analysis and publication bias assessment were undertaken.
RESULTS
A total of 1850 studies were initially identified. Sixteen clinical trials were eligible for qualitative synthesis, and ten were included in the meta-analysis. In terms of the gingival index, in total, no statistically significant difference was observed between chlorhexidine and probiotics within 4 weeks (WMD -0.03, 95% CI: -0.09∼0.04, = 0.3885). Similar to GI, no statistically significant difference was observed between chlorhexidine and probiotics regarding the plaque index within 4 weeks (WMD 0.11, 95% CI: -0.05∼0.28, = 0.1726). No statistically significant difference was observed between chlorhexidine and probiotics in all time intervals regarding oral hygiene index-simplified (WMD -0.01, 95% CI: -0.05∼0.04, = 0.7508). The robustness of these findings was confirmed by sensitivity analysis and publication bias assessments.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings, probiotics were an acceptable alternative to conventional chlorhexidine in improving periodontal health. High-quality studies with rigorous methodology should be conducted to assess the optimum doses of probiotics for clinical implications.
PubMed: 36726858
DOI: 10.1155/2023/4013004 -
Biomedical Engineering Online Dec 2022The impact of the pandemic caused by the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), causing the disease COVID-19, has brought losses to the world in terms of deaths, economic and health... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The impact of the pandemic caused by the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), causing the disease COVID-19, has brought losses to the world in terms of deaths, economic and health problems. The expected return of the public to activities adapted to the new health situation led to discussions about the use of vaccination and its effects. However, the demand for proof of vaccination showed how inconsistent, unregistered, and uncontrolled this health process is with current technologies. Despite the proven effectiveness of vaccines in reducing infection rates, mortality, and morbidity, there are still doubts about their use in preventing certain infections and injuries, as well as the use of digital medical records for identification at public events and disease prevention. Therefore, this review aims to analyze the use of digital immunization cards in disease prevention in general.
METHODS
A systematic review of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, LILACS /BSV, CINALH, and IEEE and Xplore was performed using PRISMA guidelines. The authors summarized the studies conducted over the last decade on the impacts of prophylaxis by control through immunization cards. Studies were selected using the following terms: Vaccination; Mobile Applications; Health Smarts Cards; Immunization Programs; Vaccination Coverage. For data analysis, we used Mendeley, Excel, RStudio, and Bibliometrix software among others.
RESULTS
A total of 1828 publications were found. After applying eligibility criteria (Articles published in Portuguese, Spanish or English in the last 10 years). Studies that only dealt with paper or physical records were excluded, as well as studies that were not linked to their country's health Department, as a possibility of bias exists with these types of information). After removing duplicates and applying filters 1 and 2, we included 18 studies in this review. This resulted in 18 papers that met our priori inclusion criteria; it was found that the most relevant sources were from the databases of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
CONCLUSIONS
Considering the selected studies, we found that scientific evidence and epidemiological surveillance are essential tools to characterize the efficiency and effectiveness of immunization passport protection intervention and to ethically justify them. Technological development of digital vaccine passports can assist in vaccination programs and positively impact disease prophylaxis.
Topics: Humans; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Vaccines; Pandemics; Chlorhexidine
PubMed: 36463207
DOI: 10.1186/s12938-022-01053-z -
The Journal of Hospital Infection Apr 2021The most effective skin antiseptic solution to reduce the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) remains unknown. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The most effective skin antiseptic solution to reduce the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) remains unknown.
AIM
To compare solutions with different chlorhexidine (CHG)-based concentrations and povidone-iodine (PVI) in adults with a central venous catheter (CVC) or arterial catheter, and identify an association with the incidence of CRBSI.
METHODS
This study evaluated randomized controlled trials comparing CHG and PVI antiseptic agents in patients aged ≥18 years with an underlying illness and a CVC or arterial catheter. The primary outcome was CRBSI rate. Network meta-analysis was performed by a frequentist-based approach with multi-variate random effects meta-analysis, and the effect size was expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
FINDINGS
The search yielded 1511 records, of which five studies (2815 catheters) were included in the network meta-analysis. The risk of CRBSI was significantly lower with 1% CHG-alcohol than with 0.5% CHG-alcohol (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.16-0.98; high certainty) or 10% PVI-aqueous (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.63; high certainty). There was no significant difference in the risk of CRBSI between 1% CHG-alcohol and 2% CHG-aqueous (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12-1.04; moderate certainty) or other antiseptic solutions. The hierarchy of efficacy in reducing CRBSI was 1% CHG-alcohol, 0.5% CHG-alcohol, 2% CHG-aqueous and 10% PVI-aqueous.
CONCLUSION
Antiseptic agents containing 1% CHG-alcohol were more strongly associated with reduced risk for CRBSI compared with agents containing 0.5% CHG-alcohol or 10% PVI-aqueous.
Topics: Adult; Alcohols; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Catheter-Related Infections; Catheterization, Central Venous; Central Venous Catheters; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Incidence; Network Meta-Analysis; Povidone-Iodine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sepsis
PubMed: 33529623
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.01.017 -
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Feb 2024To assess which decontamination method(s) used for the debridement of titanium surfaces (disks and dental implants) contaminated with bacterial, most efficiently... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effectiveness of mechanical and chemical decontamination methods for the treatment of dental implant surfaces affected by peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess which decontamination method(s) used for the debridement of titanium surfaces (disks and dental implants) contaminated with bacterial, most efficiently eliminate bacterial biofilms.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases between January 1, 2010 and October 31, 2022. The search strategy followed the PICOS format and included only in vitro studies completed on either dental implant or titanium disk samples. The assessed outcome variable consisted of the most effective method(s)-chemical or mechanical- removing bacterial biofilm from titanium surfaces. A meta-analysis was conducted, and data was summarized through single- and multi-level random effects model (p < .05).
RESULTS
The initial search resulted in 5260 articles after the removal of duplicates. After assessment by title, abstract, and full-text review, a total of 13 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Different decontamination methods were assessed, including both mechanical and chemical, with the most common method across studies being chlorhexidine (CHX). Significant heterogeneity was noted across the included studies. The meta-analyses only identified a significant difference in biofilm reduction when CHX treatment was compared against PBS. The remaining comparisons did not identify significant differences between the various decontamination methods.
CONCLUSIONS
The present results do not demonstrate that one method of decontamination is superior in eliminating bacterial biofilm from titanium disk and implant surfaces.
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Dental Implants; Titanium; Decontamination; Chlorhexidine; Bacteria
PubMed: 38345466
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.839 -
Journal of Dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) Dec 2020Herbal products are increasingly growing in the oral care market. Some of the related herbal compounds in this field have considerable clinical evidence for use in... (Review)
Review
Herbal products are increasingly growing in the oral care market. Some of the related herbal compounds in this field have considerable clinical evidence for use in mouthwashes in their background. Camellia sinensis or tea plant has attracted numerous researchers of dentistry and pharmaceutical sciences, in recent years, for its biologic and medicinal properties. The effects such as anti-septic, anti-oxidative, and anti-inflammatory activities have made this plant a suitable candidate for preparation of mouthwashes. In this systematic review, we tried to find, evaluate, and categorize the sparse evidence in medical literature about Camellia sinensis mouthwashes. We explored three scientific databases with keywords including tea, dental care, Camellia sinensis, and mouthwashes and found 69 relevant studies including 41 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which are generally proposing anti-microbial, anti-plaque, and analgesic indications for these tea formulations. Considering the main trend in clinical evidence and favorable safety profile, Camellia sinensis products are able to act as antiseptic, anti-plaque, and anti-inflammatory agents and can be used as useful mouthwashes in the future clinical studies and practice.
PubMed: 33344675
DOI: 10.30476/DENTJODS.2020.83204.1045 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2023Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication of surgery, increasing healthcare costs and hospital stay. Chlorhexidine (CHX) and povidone-iodine (PVI)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication of surgery, increasing healthcare costs and hospital stay. Chlorhexidine (CHX) and povidone-iodine (PVI) are used for skin antisepsis, minimising SSIs. There is concern that resistance to topical biocides may be emergeing, although the potential clinical implications remain unclear. The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether the minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of topical preparations of CHX or PVI have changed over time, in microbes relevant to SSI. We included studies reporting the MBC of laboratory and clinical isolates of common microbes to CHX and PVI. We excluded studies using non-human samples and antimicrobial solvents or mixtures with other active substances. MBC was pooled in random effects meta-analyses and the change in MBC over time was explored using meta-regression. Seventy-nine studies were included, analysing 6218 microbes over 45 years. Most studies investigated CHX (93%), with insufficient data for meta-analysis of PVI. There was no change in the MBC of CHX to Staphylococci or Streptococci over time. Overall, we find no evidence of reduced susceptibility of common SSI-causing microbes to CHX over time. This provides reassurance and confidence in the worldwide guidance that CHX should remain the first-choice agent for surgical skin antisepsis.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Povidone-Iodine; Chlorhexidine; Preoperative Care; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 36611032
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-26658-1