Erosion-Protective Capacity of the Salivary Pellicle of Female and Male Subjects Is Not Different

Abstract

This study aimed to analyse if the erosion-protective potential of the salivary pellicle is different between female and male subjects. Bovine enamel and dentin specimens (each n = 3) were exposed to the oral cavity of healthy female or male volunteers (each n = 25, females: 25.8 ± 3.5 years, males: 26.7 ± 4.0 years) for 120 min to form a salivary pellicle. Subsequently, each 2 enamel and 2 dentin specimens were eroded with hydrochloric acid (pH 2.6, 60 s). Specimens of the control group (each n = 30) were eroded without presenting a salivary pellicle. Calcium release into the acid was determined photometrically. Additionally, total protein content in the pellicle (each n = 1 enamel and dentin specimen/volunteer) and different salivary parameters (flow rate, pH, buffer capacity, protein, albumin, calcium, phosphate, fluoride) were assessed. Statistical analyses were performed by one-way ANOVA, t tests, multiple linear regressions and Pearson correlations (p < 0.05). The erosion-protective capacity was not significantly different among female (calcium release [% of control]: enamel: 82.6 ± 28.1, dentin: 80.7 ± 24.0) and male (enamel: 76.0 ± 27.5, dentin: 87.1 ± 34.9) subjects. The protein content of the pellicle was not different between female and male subjects. The protein content and pH of unstimulated saliva were significantly reduced in female compared to male volunteers. Calcium release was neither correlated with the protein content of the salivary pellicle nor with salivary parameters. Under the conditions of the present study, the erosion-protective capacity of the salivary pellicle of female and male subjects is not different.

Effect of face masks on salivary parameters and halitosis: Randomized controlled crossover trial

“…At each study visit, salivary samples were collected prior and after wearing the respective face masks for 4 h or the 4‐h period without wearing any mask, respectively. Salivary samples were collected as described previously by Wiegand et al 16 First, unstimulated saliva samples were collected for 5 min. Afterwards, stimulated saliva samples were collected for 5 min while chewing a paraffin pellet (MD2425; AUROSAN).…”

“…Sample size of this study was calculated based on the primary outcome parameter (unstimulated salivary flow rate) using the software R (http://www.r-project.org, version 4.0.4). At baseline, the unstimulated salivary flow rate was expected to amount to 0.8 ± 0.4 ml/min, 16 and to remain constant without wearing any face masks. After wearing masks for 4 h, a reduced salivary flow rate of 0.7 ml/min (cloth masks) or 0.6 ml/min (surgical/FFP2 masks) was expected.…”