Efficacy of water filters for dental chair units: assessment of the filtration action versus Coxsackievirus B5


Dental chair, hydraulic system, biological safety, microbiological tests, coxsackie virus.


Introduction: The microbiological safety and control of the water used in dental practice has a critical importance for avoiding cross-linked infections in the dental office. The aim of this study was to establish coxsackie virus filtration of the water applied to a dental unit.

Methods: A specific water filter system was used, to verify the viral load in the outgoing water. Statistical analysis was performed using the Shapiro-Wilk test and Statview software from SAS Institute.

Results: The outcome of the evaluation of the virological tests shows an excellent capability of virus filtration that attested 99.9999% in the volume analysed. A statistical difference was found in the bacterial water contamination before and after filtration. (P=0.000000). 

Conclusions: According to the tests, medical devices applied to a dental unit are able to filter viruses and therefore reduce risk of contamination in the dental office.



1. Ma’ayeh, S.Y.; Al-Hiyasat, A.S.; Hindiyeh, M.Y.; Khader, Y.S. Legionella pneumophila contamination of a dental unit water line system in a dental teaching centre. Int. J. Dent. Hyg. 2008, 6, 48–55.
2. Uzel, A.; Cogulu, D.; Oncag, O. Microbiological evaluation and antibiotic susceptibility of dental unit water systems in general dental practice. Int. J. Dent. Hyg. 2008, 6, 43–7.
3. Szymańska, J.; Sitkowska, J. Bacterial contamination of dental unit waterlines. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2013, 185, 3603–3611.
4. Liberatore, L.; Murmura, F.; Scarano, A. Bathing water profile in the coastal belt of the province of Pescara (Italy, Central Adriatic Sea). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2015, 95, 100–106.
5. Ronnie H Etymologia: Coxsackievirus. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2012, 18, 1871–1871.
6. Declerck, P.; Behets, J.; van Hoef, V.; Ollevier, F. Detection of Legionella spp. and some of their amoeba hosts in floating biofilms from anthropogenic and natural aquatic environments. Water Res. 2007, 41, 3159–67.
7. Pankhurst, C.L.; Coulter, W.A. Do contaminated dental unit waterlines pose a risk of infection? J. Dent. 2007, 35, 712–20.
8. Autio, K.L.; Rosen, S.; Reynolds, N.J.; Bright, J.S. Studies on cross-contamination in the dental clinic. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 1980, 100, 358–61.
9. Zhang, Y.; Ping, Y.; Zhou, R.; Wang, J.; Zhang, G. High throughput sequencing-based analysis of microbial diversity in dental unit waterlines supports the importance of providing safe water for clinical use. J. Infect. Public Health 2018, 11, 357–363.
10. Monarca, S.; Garusi, G.; Gigola, P.; Spampinato, L.; Zani, C.; Sapelli, P.L. [Decontamination of dental unit waterlines using disinfectants and filters]. Minerva Stomatol. 2002, 51, 451–9.
11. Scarano, A.; Lucchina Greco, C.; Darcangelo, C.; Stilla, P.; Di Carlo, T. Bacteriological Safety of Water Filters for Dental Units: Evalutation of the Filtration Action against S. Aureus and E. Coli. J. Dent. Oral Care 2018, 4, 13–16.
12. Glass, R.T.; Bullard, J.W.; Conrad, R.S.; Blewett, E.L. Evaluation of the sanitization effectiveness of a denture-cleaning product on dentures contaminated with known microbial flora. An in vitro study. Quintessence Int. 2004, 35, 194–9.