Cargando…

Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses

PURPOSE: To evaluate the in vitro inactivation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) with hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) and povidone‐iodine (PVP‐I) oral antiseptic rinses at clinically recommended concentrations and contact times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SARS‐CoV‐2, USA‐WA1/2...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bidra, Avinash S., Pelletier, Jesse S, Westover, Jonna B, Frank, Samantha, Brown, Seth M, Tessema, Belachew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7361576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32608097
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13220
_version_ 1783559382661857280
author Bidra, Avinash S.
Pelletier, Jesse S
Westover, Jonna B
Frank, Samantha
Brown, Seth M
Tessema, Belachew
author_facet Bidra, Avinash S.
Pelletier, Jesse S
Westover, Jonna B
Frank, Samantha
Brown, Seth M
Tessema, Belachew
author_sort Bidra, Avinash S.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate the in vitro inactivation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) with hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) and povidone‐iodine (PVP‐I) oral antiseptic rinses at clinically recommended concentrations and contact times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SARS‐CoV‐2, USA‐WA1/2020 strain virus stock was prepared prior to testing by growing in Vero 76 cells. The culture media for prepared virus stock was minimum essential medium (MEM) with 2% fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 50 µg/mL gentamicin. Test compounds consisting of PVP‐I oral rinse solutions and H(2)O(2) aqueous solutions were mixed directly with the virus solution so that the final concentration was 50% of the test compound and 50% of the virus solution. Thus PVP‐I was tested at concentrations of 0.5%, 1.25%, and 1.5%, and H(2)O(2) was tested at 3% and 1.5% concentrations to represent clinically recommended concentrations. Ethanol and water were evaluated in parallel as standard positive and negative controls. All samples were tested at contact periods of 15 seconds and 30 seconds. Surviving virus from each sample was then quantified by standard end‐point dilution assay and the log reduction value of each compound compared to the negative control was calculated. RESULTS: After the 15‐second and 30‐second contact times, PVP‐I oral antiseptic rinse at all 3 concentrations of 0.5%, 1.25%, and 1.5% completely inactivated SARS‐CoV‐2. The H(2)O(2) solutions at concentrations of 1.5% and 3.0% showed minimal viricidal activity after 15 seconds and 30 seconds of contact time. CONCLUSIONS: SARS‐CoV‐2 virus was completely inactivated by PVP‐I oral antiseptic rinse in vitro, at the lowest concentration of 0.5 % and at the lowest contact time of 15 seconds. Hydrogen peroxide at the recommended oral rinse concentrations of 1.5% and 3.0% was minimally effective as a viricidal agent after contact times as long as 30 seconds. Therefore, preprocedural rinsing with diluted PVP‐I in the range of 0.5% to 1.5% may be preferred over hydrogen peroxide during the COVID‐19 pandemic.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7361576
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73615762020-07-15 Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses Bidra, Avinash S. Pelletier, Jesse S Westover, Jonna B Frank, Samantha Brown, Seth M Tessema, Belachew J Prosthodont Original Manuscripts PURPOSE: To evaluate the in vitro inactivation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) with hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) and povidone‐iodine (PVP‐I) oral antiseptic rinses at clinically recommended concentrations and contact times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SARS‐CoV‐2, USA‐WA1/2020 strain virus stock was prepared prior to testing by growing in Vero 76 cells. The culture media for prepared virus stock was minimum essential medium (MEM) with 2% fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 50 µg/mL gentamicin. Test compounds consisting of PVP‐I oral rinse solutions and H(2)O(2) aqueous solutions were mixed directly with the virus solution so that the final concentration was 50% of the test compound and 50% of the virus solution. Thus PVP‐I was tested at concentrations of 0.5%, 1.25%, and 1.5%, and H(2)O(2) was tested at 3% and 1.5% concentrations to represent clinically recommended concentrations. Ethanol and water were evaluated in parallel as standard positive and negative controls. All samples were tested at contact periods of 15 seconds and 30 seconds. Surviving virus from each sample was then quantified by standard end‐point dilution assay and the log reduction value of each compound compared to the negative control was calculated. RESULTS: After the 15‐second and 30‐second contact times, PVP‐I oral antiseptic rinse at all 3 concentrations of 0.5%, 1.25%, and 1.5% completely inactivated SARS‐CoV‐2. The H(2)O(2) solutions at concentrations of 1.5% and 3.0% showed minimal viricidal activity after 15 seconds and 30 seconds of contact time. CONCLUSIONS: SARS‐CoV‐2 virus was completely inactivated by PVP‐I oral antiseptic rinse in vitro, at the lowest concentration of 0.5 % and at the lowest contact time of 15 seconds. Hydrogen peroxide at the recommended oral rinse concentrations of 1.5% and 3.0% was minimally effective as a viricidal agent after contact times as long as 30 seconds. Therefore, preprocedural rinsing with diluted PVP‐I in the range of 0.5% to 1.5% may be preferred over hydrogen peroxide during the COVID‐19 pandemic. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-07-24 2020-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7361576/ /pubmed/32608097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13220 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Prosthodontics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Prosthodontists https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Manuscripts
Bidra, Avinash S.
Pelletier, Jesse S
Westover, Jonna B
Frank, Samantha
Brown, Seth M
Tessema, Belachew
Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses
title Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses
title_full Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses
title_fullStr Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses
title_short Comparison of In Vitro Inactivation of SARS CoV‐2 with Hydrogen Peroxide and Povidone‐Iodine Oral Antiseptic Rinses
title_sort comparison of in vitro inactivation of sars cov‐2 with hydrogen peroxide and povidone‐iodine oral antiseptic rinses
topic Original Manuscripts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7361576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32608097
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13220
work_keys_str_mv AT bidraavinashs comparisonofinvitroinactivationofsarscov2withhydrogenperoxideandpovidoneiodineoralantisepticrinses
AT pelletierjesses comparisonofinvitroinactivationofsarscov2withhydrogenperoxideandpovidoneiodineoralantisepticrinses
AT westoverjonnab comparisonofinvitroinactivationofsarscov2withhydrogenperoxideandpovidoneiodineoralantisepticrinses
AT franksamantha comparisonofinvitroinactivationofsarscov2withhydrogenperoxideandpovidoneiodineoralantisepticrinses
AT brownsethm comparisonofinvitroinactivationofsarscov2withhydrogenperoxideandpovidoneiodineoralantisepticrinses
AT tessemabelachew comparisonofinvitroinactivationofsarscov2withhydrogenperoxideandpovidoneiodineoralantisepticrinses