Electrolyzed Water Kills Oral Bacteria But May Harm Healthy Cells
- Authors
- Surena Vahabi, Mehdi Shokri, Masih Lazar
- Journal
- Iranian Journal of Medical Sciences
- Year
- 2020
- DOI
- 10.30476/ijms.2019.45392
- Study Type
- Cell Culture
- Outcome
- Positive
- Peer Reviewed
- Yes
- Country
- Iran
- Health Condition
- Dental Plaque
- Body System
- Oral Health
TL;DR
Electrolyzed water (EW) effectively kills dental plaque bacteria but can also harm human cells, with effects varying by cell type and exposure time.
Key Finding
Electrolyzed water significantly inhibited the growth of oral pathogenic bacteria across all pH levels tested, with the strongest effect against Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, but also showed variable cytotoxic effects on human cells depending on exposure time and cell type.
Summary
Researchers tested electrolyzed water (water treated with electrical current) at different acidity levels to see if it could kill bacteria that cause dental plaque and gum disease. The water successfully killed several types of oral bacteria, but it also damaged human cells in the lab—with the damage varying depending on how long the cells were exposed and which type of cells were tested. This suggests electrolyzed water could be useful for oral health, but the right conditions would need to be carefully worked out before using it in people's mouths.
Practical Takeaway
While this laboratory study suggests electrolyzed water may have antimicrobial properties relevant to oral health, it was conducted only in cell cultures, not in humans or even in mouths. The fact that the water damaged human cells at certain exposure times raises safety concerns that would need to be addressed before any practical application. Much more research, including human studies, would be needed to determine if electrolyzed water could be safely used as an oral rinse or treatment.
Abstract
Background: Microbial plaque-induced oral diseases are among the most common diseases worldwide. The present study aimed to compare the antimicrobial effect of electrolyzed water (EW), (acidic, mildly basic, and basic) on the growth of bacterial species producing dental plaque and to assess their cytotoxicity on fibroblasts and epithelial cells. Methods: The study was performed at Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences in 2019. Several bacterial species (Streptococcus salivarius, Staphylococcus aureus, Lactobacillus casei, and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans) were treated with different EW types at three pH values (3, 9, and 11) for 30 seconds and subsequently, the colonies were counted. The cytotoxic effect of these EW types was evaluated on HeLa and L929 cell lines at 30 seconds, 1 minute, and 5 minutes. GraphPad Prism 6.0 was used for statistical analysis. The Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Mann-Whitney U and one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test were used to analyze bacterial activity and cell cytotoxicity, respectively. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: EW types significantly inhibited bacterial growth at all pH values. The strongest antibacterial activity of EW was against A. actinomycetemcomitans (P<0.001) and the least significant antibacterial activity was against S. aureus (P<0.001). The EW types showed increased cytotoxic activity against L929 cells as the treatment time increased. The most cytotoxic effect was seen at 5 minutes of treatment in all EW types compared with the negative control group (P<0.0001). This negative cytotoxic effect on HeLa cells was shown just after 30 seconds and viable cell counts increased over time, reaching its highest value at 5 minutes of treatment with basic EW (P<0.0001). Conclusion: The contradictory effects of the EW types on both HeLa and fibroblasts, in addition to variable results at different exposure times, indicated that the effect of EW could vary depending on cell types and treatment periods.