Abstract
Objectives
The
aims of this study are to assess different saliva substitutes for their
efficacy to lubricate the oral cavity, and to relate this oral
lubrication to the ability of saliva substitutes to adsorb on and change
the structure of the existing salivary conditioning film (SCF).
Materials and methods
Quartz
crystal microbalance with dissipation was used to study the capability
of saliva substitutes to interact with natural SCF and the ability to
change the secondary SCF (S-SCF). A tongue-enamel friction system
mimicking xerostomic conditions was used to assess the relief and relief
period expected from these substitutes under set circumstances.
Results
Saliva
Orthana spray, Biotène spray and Gum Hydral gel had an immediate effect
on a SCF, increasing its structural softness. BioXtra gel, Biotène gel,
Gum Hydral gel and Glandosane spray changed the S-SCF by increasing
salivary protein adsorption, while others showed no sign of interaction.
With respect to relief, only 2 out of the 16 saliva substitutes tested
(Saliva Orthana spray and Gum Hydral gel) performed better than water.
Overall, relief period correlated positively to structural softness
change, whereas a positive correlation was seen between relief and mass
adsorption.
Conclusions
The
majority of saliva substitutes did not adsorb on the SCF, thus did not
enhance lubrication. Only saliva substitutes containing carrageenan,
carboxymethylcellulose, pig gastric mucin, xanthan gum and carbomer
performed better in enhancing oral lubrication.
Clinical relevance
This
objective assessment will help clinicians and patients make better
choice of saliva substitutes. This study provides a scientific basis for
future improvement in saliva substitutes.
Comments