No abstract

Background The aim of this research is to verify whether there is evidence in the literature regarding the decrease in viral load present in saliva after using three types of mouthwashes. Material and Methods Clinical and/or in vitro experimental studies that have used mouthwashes as a form of intervention to reduce the viral load in saliva were included. Combinations of words and appropriate truncations were adapted for each of the seven selected electronic bases including grey literature. Results The selection of articles was carried out in two phases by two independent reviewers. After removing duplicate articles, 1245 references were maintained, and 2 articles were included in the Systematic Review. Both studies were performed in vitro and tested the virucidal action of the PVP-I solution for mouthwash at two different concentrations, 1% without dilution and 7% with 1:30 dilution, on the SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV viruses. Both showed a viral reduction of ≥ 99.99% with 15 s exposure. Conclusions Based on the evidence currently available in the literature, PVP-I, at concentrations of 1 and 7%, appears to be the most effective mouthwash for reducing the viral load of COVID-19 present in human saliva. However, the guidelines for dental care refer to the use of hydrogen peroxide but there is insufficient scientific evidence to support this recommendation. Key words: COVID-19, Coronavirus, Mouthwash, Chlorhexidine, Hydrogen Peroxide, PVP-I.

Summary Background Orthognathic surgery involves a change in the patient’s functional and aesthetic aspects. Objective The objective was to answer the following focused question: what is the impact on quality of life (QoL; aesthetic, function, social, and psychological aspects) in patients undergoing orthodontic-surgical treatment? Search methods Appropriate word combinations and truncations were selected and tailored specifically for each electronic database: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature and gray literature. Selection criteria Studies that met the following criteria was included: patients with dentofacial deformity (P); surgical correction through orthodontic-surgical treatment (E/I); before orthodontic-surgical treatment or patients with no dentofacial deformity (C); QoL (O); cross-sectional, cohort, case-control and randomized or non-randomized clinical trial (S). Data collection and analysis In phase 1, two reviewers independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of all references. All articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. In phase 2, the same reviewers completely read the selected articles independently. Results A total of 2879 articles were retrieved during the final database search. Fifty-two articles were selected for full reading, of which 16 were excluded, resulting in 36 included articles. The meta-analysis was performed using 13 of the selected studies. When comparing the period before any treatment with the post-operative period of 4–8 weeks, there was an association only for facial aesthetics (mean difference = 3.00; 95 per cent confidence interval = 1.10–4.89; inconsistency index = 63 per cent). The comparison between the period before any treatment with the 6 month post-operative period showed an improved QoL in all of the domains evaluated and, when comparing data after the orthodontic-surgical preparation (before surgery) and after 5–12 months of surgery, there was also statistical significance with an increased QoL for all of the domains evaluated. Conclusions In conclusion, based on the results of this systematic review and meta-analysis, the evidence suggests an improvement in the QoL of patients undergoing orthodontic-surgical treatment regarding aesthetic, functional, social, and psychological aspects. Registration CRD42017069495

No abstract