ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Povidone-iodine and hydrogen peroxide could be effective in against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: A "non-interventional trial" in 88 patients (43±17 yrs., 55% men) with SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swabs (RT-PCR). 31 received mouth rinses/gargling with povidone-iodine (every 8 hours, two consecutive days), 17 with mouth rinses/gargling of hydrogen peroxide, and 40 controls. Were repeated PCR in 3, 11 and 17 days. RESULTS: After intervention the viral load (Log10 copies/ml) remained similar in povidone-iodine (4.3±2.7 copies/ml), hydrogen peroxide (4.6±2.9 copies/ml; p=0.40) and controls (4.4±3.0 copies/ml). The percentage of patients with a negative result in the second PCR was 27% in povidone-iodine group, 23% in hydrogen peroxide and 32% in controls; in the third PCR, 62%, 54% y 58% respectively; and in the fourth PCR, 81%, 75% y 81%. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support the clinical usefulness of mouth rinses/gargling with povidone-iodine or hydrogen peroxide in patients with COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Povidone-iodine and hydrogen peroxide could be effective in against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: A "non-interventional trial" in 88 patients (43±17 yrs., 55% men) with SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swabs (RT-PCR). 31 received mouth rinses/gargling with povidone-iodine (every 8h, two consecutive days), 17 with mouth rinses/gargling of hydrogen peroxide, and 40 controls. Were repeated PCR in 3, 11 and 17 days. RESULTS: After intervention the viral load (Log10 copies/ml) remained similar in povidone-iodine (4.3±2.7 copies/ml), hydrogen peroxide (4.6±2.9 copies/ml; p=0.40) and controls (4.4±3.0 copies/ml). The percentage of patients with a negative result in the second PCR was 27% in povidone-iodine group, 23% in hydrogen peroxide and 32% in controls; in the third PCR, 62%, 54% y 58% respectively; and in the fourth PCR, 81%, 75% y 81%. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support the clinical usefulness of mouth rinses/gargling with povidone-iodine or hydrogen peroxide in patients with COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Oral manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including ulcers, herpetiform lesions, macules, and petechiae, among others, are becoming increasingly recognized, but there is little guidance on their treatment. Reported cases have described treatment with various mouthwashes containing antivirals, antifungals, antibiotics, anesthetics, or steroids. Our case report is unique in that we provide guidance on the judicious use of these medications, followed by photobiomodulation therapy if the manifestations are treatment resistant. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe a 30-year-old Caucasian woman who tested positive for COVID-19 after developing nasal congestion and cough. Ten days after testing positive, she developed a systemic rash on her extremities and torso. At the same time, she developed swelling of the tongue lasting 1 hour, with subsequent appearance of oral lesions that resembled geographic tongue. She also had an irritable sensation on her tongue and some mild loss of sense of taste. We opted for conservative therapy, including mouth rinses containing lidocaine to be used every 6 hours. The patient used the mouth rinse therapy for 1 month and experienced a 90% improvement in her oral lesions and tongue sensitivity. However, she had repeated flares every 3 weeks over a 6-month period, and the steroid mouthwash achieved incomplete resolution. After three sessions of photobiomodulation therapy, she had no further flares or tongue sensitivity and the lesions healed. CONCLUSIONS: The implication of our report is that we promote the judicious use of topical antibiotics, antivirals, antifungals, and steroids for when they are indicated. We propose lidocaine-containing mouth rinses and steroid mouthwash as an initial, symptomatic treatment regimen for 'COVID-19 tongue.' If there is failure of resolution, we recommend photobiomodulation therapy.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Oral Ulcer , Tongue Diseases , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antifungal Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , Conservative Treatment , Female , Humans , Lidocaine , Mouthwashes/therapeutic use , Tongue , Tongue Diseases/drug therapyABSTRACT
Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is detectable in saliva from asymptomatic individuals, suggesting a potential benefit from the use of mouth rinses to suppress viral load and reduce virus spread. Published studies on the reduction of SARS-CoV-2-induced cytotoxic effects by mouth rinses do not exclude antiseptic mouth rinse-associated cytotoxicity. Here, we determined the effect of commercially available mouth rinses and antiseptic povidone-iodine on the infectivity of replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 viruses and of pseudotyped SARS-CoV-2 viruses. We first determined the effect of mouth rinses on cell viability to ensure that antiviral activity was not a consequence of mouth rinse-induced cytotoxicity. Colgate Peroxyl (hydrogen peroxide) exhibited the most cytotoxicity, followed by povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG), and Listerine (essential oils and alcohol). The potent antiviral activities of Colgate Peroxyl mouth rinse and povidone-iodine were the consequence of rinse-mediated cellular damage when the products were present during infection. The potency of CHG was greater when the product was not washed off after virus attachment, suggesting that the prolonged effect of mouth rinses on cells impacts the antiviral outcome. To minimalize mouth rinse-associated cytotoxicity, mouth rinse was largely removed from treated viruses by centrifugation prior to infection of cells. A 5% (v/v) dilution of Colgate Peroxyl or povidone-iodine completely blocked viral infectivity. A similar 5% (v/v) dilution of Listerine or CHG had a moderate suppressive effect on the virus, but a 50% (v/v) dilution of Listerine or CHG blocked viral infectivity completely. Mouth rinses inactivated the virus without prolonged incubation. The new infectivity assay, with limited impacts of mouth rinse-associated cytotoxicity, showed the differential effects of mouth rinses on SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our results indicate that mouth rinses can significantly reduce virus infectivity, suggesting a potential benefit for reducing SARS-CoV-2 spread.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: One of the key approaches to minimize the risk of COVID-19 transmission would be to reduce the titres of SARS-CoV-2 in the saliva of infected COVID-19 patients. This is particularly important in high-risk procedures like dental treatment. The present randomized control trial evaluated the efficacy of three commercial mouth-rinse viz. povidone-iodine (PI), chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) and cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC), in reducing the salivary SARS-CoV-2 viral load in COVID-19 patients compared with water. METHODS: A total of 36 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were recruited, of which 16 patients were randomly assigned to four groups-PI group (n = 4), CHX group (n = 6), CPC group (n = 4) and water as control group (n = 2). Saliva samples were collected from all patients at baseline and at 5 min, 3 h and 6 h post-application of mouth-rinses/water. The samples were subjected to SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR analysis. RESULTS: Comparison of salivary Ct values of patients within each group of PI, CHX, CPC and water at 5 min, 3 h and 6 h time points did not show any significant differences. However, when the Ct value fold change of each of the mouth-rinse group patients were compared with the fold change of water group patients at the respective time points, a significant increase was observed in the CPC group patients at 5 min and 6 h and in the PI group patients at 6 h. CONCLUSION: The effect of decreasing salivary load with CPC and PI mouth-rinsing was observed to be sustained at 6 h time point. Within the limitation of the current study, as number of the samples analyzed, the use of CPC and PI formulated that commercial mouth-rinses may be useful as a pre-procedural rinse to help reduce the transmission of COVID-19. ISRCTN (ISRCTN95933274), 09/09/20, retrospectively registered.