Salivary nitric oxide, Simplified Oral Hygiene Index, and salivary flow rate in smokers and non-smokers: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Background: Salivary nitric oxide plays an important role as an antibacterial agent in the oral cavity. Here, we analyze salivary nitric oxide, Simplified Oral Hygiene Index (OHI-S) scores and the salivary flow rate in smokers and non-smokers which has not been done previously. Methods: A cross sectional study included 25 smokers and 25 non-smokers. Their OHI-S results were categorized as “good,” “medium,” or “bad.” Unstimulated saliva samples were collected, and their nitric oxide concentration was measured using the Griess method. Results: The salivary flow rate in smokers was lower, at 0.30 ml/minute, compared to non-smokers who had a salivary flow rate of 0.33 ml/minute. This was statistically insignificant. There was a significant difference in the concentrations of nitric oxide between smokers and non-smokers (p < 0.05). Smokers had higher concentrations than non-smokers (185.4 µM Vs 114.60 µM). In addition, there was a moderate positive correlation (r = 0.305) between the concentration of salivary nitric oxide level and the OHI-S results. Conclusions: It was concluded that salivary nitric oxide concentration was higher in smokers, and the oral hygiene condition of smokers was poor.

The impact of electronic and conventional cigarettes on periodontal health—a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Alteration of salivary composition, including enzymes and immunoglobulins, leads to loss of defense functions and may promote plaque formation [ 102 – 104 ]. The influence of the salivary flow rate in this context has been rebutted in the study by Mokeem et al [ 57 ], whereas others demonstrated a significant reduction of salivary flow rate in smokers compared to non-smokers [ 96 , 105 ]. Possible reasons suggest a chemical-thermal degradation of nitric oxide [ 106 ], an autoregulator of salivary secretion, and a reduction of salivary secretion due to nicotine-mediated vasoconstriction [ 107 , 108 ].…”

Influence of controlled environmental conditions in potential salivary ocular pain biomarkers for enhancing the assessment of ocular pain

“…Thirty-four healthy subjects, 20 male, 14 female, median age 35.44 years (range [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40] were exposed for 30 minutes under standard environmental conditions (T: 22˚C, 50% relative humidity) in the Controlled Environmental Research Laboratory (CE-Lab, Vision R&D, Valladolid Spain) in two separate visits (V1, V2) at least 24 hours apart. Saliva was collected after the exposure in each of the visits, and cortisol, α-amylase (sAA), secretory IgA (sIgA), testosterone, and soluble fraction of TNFα receptor II (sTNFαRII) were analyzed by ELISA.…”

“…Fourteen participants in the study were men and twenty women. The median age was 35.4 years old (range [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40].…”

Immunoassay standardization for the detection of immunoglobulin A (IgA) against Porphyromonas gingivalis antigens in saliva of individuals with and without leprosy

“…Following this, the individual chewed for another 5 min and the saliva produced collected at one minute intervals in a beaker using a funnel to help (Krasse 1988 ). The saliva collected was stored in a microcentrifuge tube with 1 µL of 0.1 M phenyl methane sulfonyl fluoride (PMSF) protease inhibitor (SIGMA-ALDRICH, Saint Louis, USA) (Bachtiar et al 2020 ).…”