These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Influence of irradiated dentin, biofilm and different artificial saliva formulations on root dentin demineralization.
    Author: de Souza BM, Braga AS, Vertuan M, Sassaki S, Araújo TT, Santos PSDS, Buzalaf MAR, Magalhães AC.
    Journal: Heliyon; 2024 Aug 30; 10(16):e36334. PubMed ID: 39247326.
    Abstract:
    The aim of this study was evaluated the influence of radiation as well as of new formulations of artificial saliva on the development of root dentin lesions. Bovine root samples were divided into: irradiated (70 Gy) dentin or not; the type of biofilm (from irradiated patient-experimental or non-irradiated patient-control) and the type of artificial saliva (for the condition irradiated dentin/biofilm from irradiated patient): Control Artificial Saliva (inorganic); Control Saliva + 1 mg/ml hemoglobin; Control Saliva +0.1 mg/ml cystatin; Control Saliva + hemoglobin + cystatin; Bioextra (positive control) and deionized water (DiW, negative control) (n = 12/group). Biofilm was produced using human biofilm and McBain saliva (0.2 % of sucrose, 37o C and 5 % CO2); the treatments were done 1x/day, for 5 days. Colony-forming units (CFU) counting was performed; demineralization was quantified by transversal microradiography. Two-way ANOVA/Bonferroni or Sidak test for the comparison between biofilm x dentin and ANOVA/Tukey or Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn for comparing artificial saliva were done (p < 0.05). The type of biofilm had no influence on CFU and demineralization. Sound dentin under control biofilm presented the lowest Lactobacillus ssp. and Streptococcus mutans CFU and the lowest mean mineral loss (R) (25.6 ± 2.2; 23.7 ± 2.9 %) compared to irradiated dentin (26.1 ± 2.8; 28.1 ± 3.3, p < 0.004) for both types of biofilms (experimental and control, respectively). Bioextra was the only artificial saliva that reduced R (10.8 ± 2.5 %) and Lesion Depth (LD) (35 ± 15 μm) compared to DiW (17.3 ± 3.3 %, 81 ± 18 μm, p < 0.0001). Irradiation has impact on caries development; the experimental saliva were unable to reduce its occurrence.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]