Efficacy of Mouth Rinses and Nasal Spray in the Inactivation of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro and In Vivo Studies

Majdy Idrees, Bridget McGowan, Amr Fawzy, Abdulwahab Ali Abuderman, Ramesh Balasubramaniam and Omar Kujan ()
Additional contact information
Majdy Idrees: UWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia
Bridget McGowan: Private Dental Practice, Darwin, NT 0810, Australia
Amr Fawzy: UWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia
Abdulwahab Ali Abuderman: College of Medicine, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj 11942, Saudi Arabia
Ramesh Balasubramaniam: UWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia
Omar Kujan: UWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 19, 1-17

Abstract: Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global and evolving pandemic associated with heavy health and financial burdens. Considering the oral cavity as the major reservoir for SARS-CoV-2, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays in reducing the salivary viral load of SARS-CoV-2. All in vivo and in vitro studies that assessed the virucidal efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays against SARS-CoV-2 and were published in the English language from December 2019 to April 2022 were considered for analyses. Special Medical Subject Headings terms were used to search Pubmed, Scopus, Embase Ovid, and Web of Science databases. The toxicological data reliability assessment tool (ToxRToool) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Thirty-three studies (11 in vivo and 22 in vitro ) were deemed eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Results of the pooled data showed that povidone-iodine is the most efficacious intervention in vivo in terms of reducing the SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load, followed by chlorhexidine. The mean difference in the viral load was 86% and 72%, respectively. Similarly, povidone-iodine was associated with the highest log 10 reduction value (LRV) in vitro , followed by cetylpyridinium chloride, (LRV = 2.938 ( p < 0.0005) and LRV = 2.907 ( p = 0.009), respectively). Povidone-iodine-based oral and nasal preparations showed favourable results in terms of reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral loads both in vivo and in vitro . Considering the limited number of patients in vivo , further studies among larger cohorts are recommended.

Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; mouth rinse; nasal spray; viral load; meta-analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12148/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12148/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12148-:d:924856

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().