ArticleFrontiers in oral health2026
Electrolyzed saline coolant mitigates bacterial airborne deposition in dental procedures.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dental procedures generate dental spray that can transmit microorganisms. Substituting conventional coolants with antiseptics may mitigate this risk by preventing the transmission of infectious particles at the source. The aim of this Methods: The bactericidal activity of EOS (pH 7.0, 200 ppm) and 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) was tested against Results: In the static assay, CHX reduced all tested bacteria species to ≤10 CFU/mL within 10 s of exposure, irrespective of the presence of saliva. In contrast, EOS was generally less effective after 10 s but exhibited near-complete antibacterial activity after 30-60 s, with delayed efficacy in the presence of saliva. During USS procedures, no culturable bacteria were detected in splatter generated with either CHX or EOS. However, compared with saline EOS reduced bacteria-laden droplets/aerosol (CFU/cm Conclusions: EOS demonstrated rapid contact-bactericidal activity and comparable dental spray deposition reduction to CHX. As a reasonably biocompatible, broad-spectrum agent, EOS may represent a promising coolant candidate for infection prevention control, warranting further clinical evaluation.
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.