ArticleBMC chemistry2025
In vitro evaluation of hypochlorous acid-silver nanoparticle waterline disinfectant for dental unit waterline disinfection.
Article in BMC chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation and Preliminary Evaluation of a Low-Cost Sodium Hypochlorite Shock Disinfection Protocol for Dental Unit Waterlines.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the disinfection efficacy of automated flexible endoscope reprocessors for flexible nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of different disinfectants.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis work intended to assess the disinfection efficacy of hypochlorous acid (HA) and silver nanoparticles (AgNP) disinfectants in disinfecting the dental unit waterlines (DUWL) during comprehensive oral treatment and explore their potential applications in the oral medical environment.
methodsFirstly, AgNP solution was prepared and evaluated through X-ray diffraction (XRD), field emission transmission electron microscope (FE-TEM), and stability tests. Subsequently, 15 dental units were selected and randomly assigned to three groups, each receiving a different disinfection method. Specifically, one group (5 units) received HA disinfectant (HA group), one group (5 units) received AgNP disinfectant (AgNP group), and another group (5 units) received a combination of HA and AgNP disinfectant (HA + AgNP group). Bacterial counts before and after disinfection were compared and analyzed at four sites on the dental units: high-speed handpiece tubing, mouthwash, ultrasonic scaler, and three-way syringe.
resultsThe growth of biofilm on the waterlines was observed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and laser confocal microscopy (LCM). The results indicated that AgNP solution was successfully prepared and demonstrated excellent stability. There was no significant difference in the average weekly number of patients treated across the three groups (P > 0.05). After disinfection, bacterial counts were significantly reduced in all groups. Compared to the HA and AgNP groups, the HA + AgNP group exhibited a markedly lower bacterial count, with statistical significance (P < 0.05). The compliance rates observed during the first disinfection and two weeks post-disinfection were slightly lower in the HA and AgNP groups compared to the HA + AgNP group, although no significant statistical difference was found (P > 0.05). SEM images revealed uneven biofilm plaques on the inner surface of the pipes prior to disinfection, embedded within a dense matrix, while the biofilm was visibly disrupted post-disinfection. LCM software analysis showed that, compared to the HA and AgNP groups, the HA + AgNP group had a significantly lower percentage of live bacteria on the biofilm post-disinfection (P < 0.05).
conclusionCompared to any single disinfectant regimen, the combined use of HA and AgNPs effectively inhibited bacterial growth and exerted a significant destructive effect on biofilms. Therefore, this combination is expected to be a viable option for disinfection of DUWL in the oral healthcare setting. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.