de Souza Beatriz Martines, Braga Aline Silva, Vertuan Mariele, Sassaki Susan, Araújo Tamara Teodoro, Santos Paulo Sergio da Silva, Buzalaf Marilia Afonso Rabelo, Magalhães Ana Carolina
Department of Biological Sciences, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Surgery, Stomatology, Pathology and Radiology, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil.
Heliyon. 2024 Aug 14;10(16):e36334. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36334. eCollection 2024 Aug 30.
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, 37 C and 5 % CO); 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.
本研究的目的是评估辐射以及新型人工唾液配方对牙根牙本质病变发展的影响。牛牙根样本被分为:接受辐射(70 Gy)的牙本质或未接受辐射的牙本质;生物膜类型(来自接受辐射患者的实验性生物膜或未接受辐射患者的对照性生物膜)以及人工唾液类型(针对接受辐射患者的辐射牙本质/生物膜情况):对照人工唾液(无机);对照唾液 + 1 mg/ml血红蛋白;对照唾液 + 0.1 mg/ml胱抑素;对照唾液 + 血红蛋白 + 胱抑素;Bioextra(阳性对照)和去离子水(DiW,阴性对照)(每组n = 12)。使用人类生物膜和McBain唾液(0.2%蔗糖,37℃和5%二氧化碳)形成生物膜;每天进行1次处理,共5天。进行菌落形成单位(CFU)计数;通过横向显微放射照相术对脱矿进行定量分析。采用双向方差分析/邦费罗尼或西达克检验对生物膜x牙本质之间进行比较,采用方差分析/图基检验或克鲁斯卡尔 - 沃利斯/邓恩检验对人工唾液进行比较(p < 0.05)。生物膜类型对CFU和脱矿没有影响。与两种生物膜类型(分别为实验性和对照性)的辐射牙本质(26.1±±2.8;28.1±±3.3,p < 0.004)相比,对照生物膜下的健康牙本质呈现出最低的嗜酸乳杆菌属和变形链球菌CFU以及最低的平均矿物质损失(R)(25.6±±2.2;23.7±±2.9%)。与DiW(17.3±±3.3%,81±±18μm,p < 0.0001)相比,Bioextra是唯一能降低R(10.8±±2.5%)和病变深度(LD)(35±±15μm)的人工唾液。辐射对龋齿发展有影响;实验性唾液无法降低其发生率。