Efficacy in reducing oral viral load (SARS-CoV-2) of three types of mouthwashes.Literature review

Abstract

In Wuhan-China, an outbreak of pneumonia of idiopathic origin was identified in December 2019; the causative agent was isolated in January 2020; a new variant of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was declared by the World Health Organization (OMS) as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Due to the ways of transmission this virus has shown a high ease of contagion, spreading rapidly, it is known that approximately 148 million infected and 3.012 million died from SARS-CoV-2, affecting more than 190 countries in 5 continents. It is important for health personnel due to the working conditions to which they are exposed, being this in order to the optimal conditions for the acquisition of this pathology. Objective: To compare the efficacy and efficiency of the use of mouthwashes: hydrogen peroxide, povidone iodine and chlorhexidine against SARS-CoV-2 viral load. Materials and methods: A search were carried out in the databases of PubMed, SAGE JOURNAL, ACP, Medigraphic, PMC, which were selected according to the inclusion criteria, obtaining 30 studies Results: Chlorhexidine (CHX) at concentrations of 0. 12% and 2% did not show a statistically significant index capable of inactivating SARS-CoV-2 viral load, Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) showed minimal inactivation to SARS-CoV-2 virus at concentrations of 0. 5%, 1.25% or 1.5%, Povidone iodine (PVP-I) is able to inactivate SARS-CoV-2, at concentrations of 0.5%, 1.25% and 1.5%, in contact periods of 60 seconds, which reduces the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Conclusion: It can be evidenced that the different mouthwashes with bactericidal or bacteriostatic effects are an important reference with the aim of protecting the professional as well asthe community. The rinse that showed the greatest effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 virus was iodopovidone with the ability to inactivate the virus and thus prevent its spread.