Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1038/s41432-021-0172-4

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1038/s41432-021-0172-4
suck pdf from google scholar
34172918!8226336!34172918
unlimited free pdf from europmc34172918    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi


Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 213.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
pmid34172918      Evid+Based+Dent 2021 ; 22 (2): 82-83
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Could certain mouthwashes reduce transmissibility of COVID-19? #MMPMID34172918
  • Elmahgoub F; Coll Y
  • Evid Based Dent 2021[Jan]; 22 (2): 82-83 PMID34172918show ga
  • Data sources Six electronic databases were searched including PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Science (LILACS). Grey literature was also examined. There were no restrictions with regards to language, time of publication or participant demographics including gender, age and ethnicity.Study selection Both clinical and in vitro studies were included in the data search. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were clearly identified. Study selection was carried out in two phases by two independent reviewers. The studies included fitted the following criteria: studies that hypothesised the use of mouthwashes as a form of intervention to decrease the viral load in saliva contaminated with coronavirus. Two other studies were included in this review and both were conducted in Germany, performed in vitro, which tested povidone-iodine (PVP-I) mouthwash at two different concentrations: 1% and 7%. Both studies used the same culture mediums for clean and dirty conditions, and the evaluated outcome was the viral titre of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. The studies were published in 2015 and 2018. Neither study evaluated the action of this mouthwash on SARS-CoV-2 infection.Data extraction and synthesis The extraction of data followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline process. Studies chosen for analysis included assessment of the following data parameters for risk of bias: cell origin and cell type used, duration of exposure, frequency of exposure, magnetic flux density of exposure, environmental background magnetic field, use of control treatment, temperature control, blinding of exposure, randomisation of exposure, measurement of cell vitality, identical methods for control and exposure groups, randomisation of data measurements and potential industry sponsorship.Results One study assessed the effect of the mouthwash on MERS-CoV and the other on both MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. In both studies, following 15 seconds of exposure to the mouthwash, a reduction in viral load of >99.99% was seen. There was a measurable reduction in viral titre in the samples, with one study reporting a reduction to 4.30 log10 TCID50/ml from 6.00-6.50 log10 TCID50/ml. Other mouthwashes such as hydrogen peroxide and chlorhexidine were not assessed in these studies.Conclusions The study concludes that PVP-I mouthwash at concentrations of 1% and 7% for 15 seconds may be effective at reducing the viral load of COVID-19 in human saliva. The level of scientific evidence, however, is low.
  • |*COVID-19[MESH]
  • |*Mouthwashes[MESH]
  • |Caribbean Region[MESH]
  • |Germany[MESH]
  • |Humans[MESH]


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box