SARS-CoV-2 impact on oral health: A general view.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a new disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. China reported the first case of COVID-19 in December 2019, and a few months later, the World Health Organization declared it as a pandemic. Oral ulcers in adult patients have been associated with COVID-19. However, no cases have yet been documented in children. The angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) receptor has been identified in tissues of the oral cavity. Studies have identified the tongue as the site with the highest expression of ACE2, and the oral epithelium, gingival epithelium, and salivary glands as sites of lesser extent expression. ACE2 expression is lower in children and varies with age. SARS-CoV-2 in saliva has been identified in various studies, which suggests that this could be a useful sample for diagnosis. However, its presence in saliva would indicate the high risk of contagion of this fluid.

Children's emotion inferences from masked faces: Implications for social interactions during COVID-19.

To slow the progression of COVID-19, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have recommended wearing face coverings. However, very little is known about how occluding parts of the face might impact the emotion inferences that children make during social interactions. The current study recruited a racially diverse sample of school-aged (7- to 13-years) children from publicly funded after-school programs. Children made inferences from facial configurations that were not covered, wearing sunglasses to occlude the eyes, or wearing surgical masks to occlude the mouth. Children were still able to make accurate inferences about emotions, even when parts of the faces were covered. These data suggest that while there may be some challenges for children incurred by others wearing masks, in combination with other contextual cues, masks are unlikely to dramatically impair children's social interactions in their everyday lives.

Susceptibility of Domestic Swine to Experimental Infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the agent that causes coronavirus disease, has been shown to infect several species. The role of domestic livestock and associated risks for humans in close contact with food production animals remains unknown for many species. Determining the susceptibility of pigs to SARS-CoV-2 is critical to a One Health approach to manage potential risk for zoonotic transmission. We found that pigs are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 after oronasal inoculation. Among 16 animals, we detected viral RNA in group oral fluids and in nasal wash from 2 pigs, but live virus was isolated from only 1 pig. Antibodies also were detected in only 2 animals at 11 and 13 days postinoculation but were detected in oral fluid samples at 6 days postinoculation, indicating antibody secretion. These data highlight the need for additional livestock assessment to determine the potential role of domestic animals in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Is the oral cavity a reservoir for prolonged SARS-CoV-2 shedding?

Limited knowledge about the contagiosity and case fatality rate of COVID-19 as well as the still enigmatic route of transmission have led to strict limitations of non-emergency health care especially in head and neck medicine and dentistry. There are theories that the oral cavity provides a favorable environment for SARS-CoV-2 entry and persistence which may be a risk for prolonged virus shedding. However, intraoral innate immune mechanisms provide antiviral effects against a myriad of pathogenic viruses. Initial hints of their efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 are surfacing. It is hypothesized that intraoral immune system activity modulates the invasion pattern of SARS-CoV-2 into oral cells. Thus, the significance of intraoral tissues for SARS-CoV-2 transmission and persistence cannot be assessed. The underlying concept for this hypothesis was developed by the critical observation of a clinically asymptomatic COVID-19 patient. Despite a positive throat swab for SARS-CoV-2, molecular pathologic analysis of an oral perisulcular tissue specimen failed to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA. More research effort is necessary to define the true origin of the contagiosity of asymptomatic COVID-19 patients.

Performance of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Real-Time RT-PCR Tests on Oral Rinses and Saliva Samples.

Access to rapid and accurate detection of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA is essential for controlling the current global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019. In this study, the use of oral rinses (ORs) and posterior oropharyngeal saliva as an alternative to swab collection methods from symptomatic and asymptomatic health care workers for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR was evaluated. For saliva samples, the overall agreement with oropharyngeal swabs was 93% (Ƙ = 0.84), with a sensitivity of 96.7% (95% CI, 83.3%-99.8%). The agreement between saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs was 97.7% (Ƙ = 0.93), with a sensitivity of 94.1% (95% CI, 73.0%-99.7%). ORs were compared with nasopharyngeal swabs only, with an overall agreement of 85.7% (Ƙ = 0.65), and a sensitivity of 63% (95% CI, 46.6%-77.8%). The agreement between a laboratory-developed test based on the CDC RT-PCR and two commercial assays, the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and the Cobas SARS-CoV-2, was also evaluated. The overall agreement was >90%. Finally, SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva samples was shown to be stable, with no changes in viral loads over 24 hours at both room temperature and 4°C. Although the dilution of SARS-CoV-2 in ORs precluded its acceptability as a sample type, posterior oropharyngeal saliva was an acceptable alternative sample type for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection.

Coronavirus Disease-19 and Rhinology/Facial Plastics.

This review summarizes the challenges and adaptations that have taken place in rhinology and facial plastics in response to the ongoing coronavirus disease-19 pandemic. In particular, the prolonged exposure and manipulation of the nasal and oral cavities portend a high risk of viral transmission. We discuss evidence-based recommendations to mitigate the risk of viral transmission through novel techniques and device implementation as well as increasing conservative management of certain pathologies.

Fecal, oral, blood and skin virome of laboratory rabbits.

Here, we investigated the fecal, oral, blood, and skin virome of 10 laboratory rabbits using a viral metagenomic method. In the oral samples, we detected a novel polyomavirus (RabPyV), and phylogenetic analysis based on the large T antigen, VP1 and VP2 regions indicated that the novel strain might have undergone a recombination event. Recombination analysis based on related genomes confirmed that RabPyV is a multiple recombinant between rodent-like and avian-like polyomaviruses. In fecal samples, three partial or complete genome sequences of viruses belonging to the families Picobirnaviridae, Parvoviridae, Microviridae and Coronaviridae were characterized, and phylogenetic trees were constructed based on the predicted amino acid sequences of viral proteins. This study increases the amount of genetic information on viruses present in laboratory rabbits.

Antimicrobial mouthwashes (gargling) and nasal sprays administered to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection to improve patient outcomes and to protect healthcare workers treating them.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 infection poses a serious risk to patients and - due to its contagious nature - to those healthcare workers (HCWs) treating them. If the mouth and nose of patients with infection are irrigated with antimicrobial solutions, this may help the patients by killing any coronavirus present at those sites. It may also reduce the risk of the active infection being passed to HCWs through droplet transmission or direct contact. However, the use of such antimicrobial solutions may be associated with harms related to the toxicity of the solutions themselves or alterations in the natural microbial flora of the mouth or nose. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of antimicrobial mouthwashes and nasal sprays administered to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection to both the patients and the HCWs caring for them. SEARCH METHODS: Information Specialists from Cochrane ENT and Cochrane Oral Health searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2020, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 June 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: This is a question that urgently requires evidence, however at the present time we did not anticipate finding many completed RCTs. We therefore planned to include the following types of studies: randomised controlled trials (RCTs); quasi-RCTs; non-randomised controlled trials; prospective cohort studies; retrospective cohort studies; cross-sectional studies; controlled before-and-after studies. We set no minimum duration for the studies.   We sought studies comparing antimicrobial mouthwash and/or nasal spray (alone or in combination) at any concentration, delivered with any frequency or dosage to suspected/confirmed COVID-19 patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: 1) RECOVERY* (www.recoverytrial.net) outcomes in patients (mortality; hospitalisation status; use of ventilation; use of renal dialysis or haemofiltration); 2) incidence of symptomatic or test-positive COVID-19 infection in HCWs; 3) significant adverse event: anosmia (or disturbance in sense of smell). Our secondary outcomes were: 4) change in COVID-19 viral load in patients; 5) COVID-19 viral content of aerosol (when present); 6) other adverse events: changes in microbiome in oral cavity, nasal cavity, oro- or nasopharynx; 7) other adverse events: allergy, irritation/burning of nasal, oral or oropharyngeal mucosa (e.g. erosions, ulcers, bleeding), long-term staining of mucous membranes or teeth, accidental ingestion. We planned to use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We found no completed studies to include in this review. We identified 16 ongoing studies (including 14 RCTs), which aim to enrol nearly 1250 participants. The interventions included in these trials are ArtemiC (artemisinin, curcumin, frankincense and vitamin C), Citrox (a bioflavonoid), cetylpyridinium chloride, chlorhexidine, chlorine dioxide, essential oils, hydrogen peroxide, hypertonic saline, Kerecis spray (omega 3 viruxide - containing neem oil and St John's wort), neem extract, nitric oxide releasing solution, povidone iodine and saline with baby shampoo.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified no studies for inclusion in this review. This is not surprising given the relatively recent emergence of COVID-19 infection. It is promising that the question posed in this review is being addressed by a number of RCTs and other studies. We are concerned that few of the ongoing studies specifically state that they will evaluate adverse events such as changes in the sense of smell or to the oral and nasal microbiota, and any consequences thereof. Very few interventions have large and dramatic effect sizes. If a positive treatment effect is demonstrated when studies are available for inclusion in this review, it may not be large. In these circumstances in particular it may be a challenge to weigh up the benefits against the harms if the latter are of uncertain frequency and severity.

Antimicrobial mouthwashes (gargling) and nasal sprays to protect healthcare workers when undertaking aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) on patients without suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 infection poses a serious risk to patients and - due to its contagious nature - to those healthcare workers (HCWs) treating them. The risks of transmission of infection are greater when a patient is undergoing an aerosol-generating procedure (AGP). Not all those with COVID-19 infection are symptomatic, or suspected of harbouring the infection. If a patient who is not known to have or suspected of having COVID-19 infection is to undergo an AGP, it would nonetheless be sensible to minimise the risk to those HCWs treating them. If the mouth and nose of an individual undergoing an AGP are irrigated with antimicrobial solutions, this may be a simple and safe method of reducing the risk of any covert infection being passed to HCWs through droplet transmission or direct contact. Alternatively, the use of antimicrobial solutions by the HCW may decrease the chance of them acquiring COVID-19 infection. However, the use of such antimicrobial solutions may be associated with harms related to the toxicity of the solutions themselves or alterations in the natural microbial flora of the mouth or nose. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of antimicrobial mouthwashes and nasal sprays administered to HCWs and/or patients when undertaking AGPs on patients without suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. SEARCH METHODS: Information Specialists from Cochrane ENT and Cochrane Oral Health searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2020, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 June 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: This is a question that urgently requires evidence, however at the present time we did not anticipate finding many completed RCTs. We therefore planned to include the following types of studies: randomised controlled trials (RCTs); quasi-RCTs; non-randomised controlled trials; prospective cohort studies; retrospective cohort studies; cross-sectional studies; controlled before-and-after studies. We set no minimum duration for the studies.   We sought studies comparing any antimicrobial mouthwash and/or nasal spray (alone or in combination) at any concentration, delivered to the patient or HCW before and/or after an AGP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: 1) incidence of symptomatic or test-positive COVID-19 infection in HCWs or patients; 2) significant adverse event: anosmia (or disturbance in sense of smell). Our secondary outcomes were: 3) COVID-19 viral content of aerosol (when present); 4) change in COVID-19 viral load at site(s) of irrigation; 5) other adverse events: changes in microbiome in oral cavity, nasal cavity, oro- or nasopharynx; 6) other adverse events: allergy, irritation/burning of nasal, oral or oropharyngeal mucosa (e.g. erosions, ulcers, bleeding), long-term staining of mucous membranes or teeth, accidental ingestion. We planned to use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We found no completed studies to include in this review.   AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified no studies for inclusion in this review, nor any ongoing studies. The absence of completed studies is not surprising given the relatively recent emergence of COVID-19 infection. However, we are disappointed that this important clinical question is not being addressed by ongoing studies.

Could nasal irrigation and oral rinse reduce the risk for COVID-19 infection?

Public health measures are essential to protect against COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The nose and the mouth represent entry portals for the COVID 19. Saline Nasal Irrigations (SNIs) can reduce the viral load in the nasal cavities. Oral rinse with antimicrobial agents is efficacious in reducing the viral load in oral fluids. We advocate the inclusion of SNIs and ethanol oral rinses as additional measures to the current public health measures, to prevent and control the transmission of any respiratory infectious disease, including COVID-19.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: an update of current literature.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiologic agent for the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, has caused a public health emergency. The need for additional research in viral pathogenesis is essential as the number of cases and deaths rise. Understanding the virus and its ability to cause disease has been the main focus of current literature; however, there is much unknown. Studies have revealed new findings related to the full transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 and its subsequent ability to cause infection by different means. The virus is hypothesized to be of increased virulence compared with previous coronavirus that caused epidemics, in part due to its overall structural integrity and resilience to inactivation. To date, many studies have discussed that the rationale behind its transmission potential is that viral RNA has unexpectedly been detected in multiple bodily fluids, with some samples having remained positive for extended periods of time. Additionally, the receptor by which the virus gains cellular entry, ACE2, has been found to be expressed in different human body systems, thereby potentiating its infection in those locations. In this evidence-based comprehensive review, we discuss various potential routes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2-respiratory/droplet, indirect, fecal-oral, vertical, sexual, and ocular. Understanding these different routes is important as they pertain to clinical practice, especially in taking preventative measures to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2.