ArticleHeliyon2024
Plasma-activated water: Candidate hand disinfectant for SARS-CoV-2 transmission disruption.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Plasma-Activated Water (PAW) Decontamination of Foodborne Bacteria in Shucked Oyster Meats Using a Compact Flow-Through Generator.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global epidemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has brought about worldwide burden and a sense of danger for more than two years, leading to a wide range of social, public health, economic and environmental issues. Self-inoculation through hands has been the primary way for environmental transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Plasma-activated water (PAW) has been reported as an effective, safe and environmentally friendly disinfectant against SARS-CoV-2. However, the inactivating effect of PAW on SARS-CoV-2 located on skin surface and its underlying mechanism of action have not been elucidated. In this study, PAW was prepared using an air-pressure plasma jet device. The antiviral efficiency of PAW1, PAW3, and PAW5 on the SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus was 8.20 % (±2.88 %), 46.24 % (±1.79 %), and 91.71 % (±0.47 %), respectively. Additionally, determination of PAW's physicochemical properties, identification of major sterile effector in PAW, transmission electron microscopy analysis, malondialdehyde (MDA) assessment, SDS-PAGE, ELISA, and qPCR were conducted to reveal the virucidal mechanism of PAW. Our experimental results suggested that peroxynitrite, which was generated by the synergism of acidic environment and reactive species, was the major sterile effector of PAW. Furthermore, we found that PAW treatment significantly inactivated SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus through the destruction of its structure of and the degradation of the viral RNA. Therefore, the possible mechanism for the structural destruction of SARS-COV-2 by PAW is through the action of peroxynitrite generated by the synergism of acidic environment and reactive species, which might react with and destroy the lipid envelope of SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus. Nevertheless, further studies are required to shed light on the interaction mechanism of PAW-inherent RONS and viral components, and to confirm the determinant factors for virus inactivation of SARS-COV-2 by PAW. Therefore, PAW may be a candidate hand disinfectant used to disrupt the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.