File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Newer saliva collection methods and saliva composition: a study of two Salivette kits.

TitleNewer saliva collection methods and saliva composition: a study of two Salivette kits.
Authors
Issue Date1995
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=1354-523X&site=1
Citation
Oral Diseases, 1995, v. 1 n. 2, p. 86-91 How to Cite?
AbstractSaliva is frequently used as a diagnostic fluid and several collection devices have been developed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the validity and reliability of two types of Salivette collection kits (non-covered cotton roll and polypropylene covered polyether roll) relative to conventional collection of saliva using paraffin wax chewing stimulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Whole saliva samples were collected from 16 healthy volunteers. Following a cross-over design saliva was collected in a standardized way. The flow rate was determined and saliva samples were analyzed for pH, buffer capacity, electrolytes and protein/glycoprotein content. RESULTS: We find that Salivette methods do not allow evaluation of flow rate. pH was unaffected but buffer capacity was lower in Salivette collected than in paraffin wax-stimulated saliva. The non-covered cotton rolls reduced the content of Na+, K+, Cl-, as well as glycoprotein markers (hexosamines, fucose, sialic acid), lysozyme, lactoferrin, salivary- and myeloperoxidase but increased the concentrations of Ca2+, PO4(3)- and SCN-. Polypropylene covered polyether rolls affected saliva composition less than the non-covered cotton rolls. Thus, SCN- and sIgA concentrations were higher and lysozyme activity lower in the former (covered roll) saliva than in paraffin wax saliva. The reliability of the Salivette kits was good. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the Salivette method generates data significantly different from conventional paraffin wax-stimulated saliva such as buffer capacity and several electrolytes and organic components. Care should be taken in interpreting the results when such methods are employed.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/153932
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.0
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.828

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLenanderLumikari, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorJohansson, Ien_US
dc.contributor.authorVilja, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorSamaranayake, LPen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:22:22Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:22:22Z-
dc.date.issued1995en_US
dc.identifier.citationOral Diseases, 1995, v. 1 n. 2, p. 86-91en_US
dc.identifier.issn1354-523Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/153932-
dc.description.abstractSaliva is frequently used as a diagnostic fluid and several collection devices have been developed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the validity and reliability of two types of Salivette collection kits (non-covered cotton roll and polypropylene covered polyether roll) relative to conventional collection of saliva using paraffin wax chewing stimulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Whole saliva samples were collected from 16 healthy volunteers. Following a cross-over design saliva was collected in a standardized way. The flow rate was determined and saliva samples were analyzed for pH, buffer capacity, electrolytes and protein/glycoprotein content. RESULTS: We find that Salivette methods do not allow evaluation of flow rate. pH was unaffected but buffer capacity was lower in Salivette collected than in paraffin wax-stimulated saliva. The non-covered cotton rolls reduced the content of Na+, K+, Cl-, as well as glycoprotein markers (hexosamines, fucose, sialic acid), lysozyme, lactoferrin, salivary- and myeloperoxidase but increased the concentrations of Ca2+, PO4(3)- and SCN-. Polypropylene covered polyether rolls affected saliva composition less than the non-covered cotton rolls. Thus, SCN- and sIgA concentrations were higher and lysozyme activity lower in the former (covered roll) saliva than in paraffin wax saliva. The reliability of the Salivette kits was good. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the Salivette method generates data significantly different from conventional paraffin wax-stimulated saliva such as buffer capacity and several electrolytes and organic components. Care should be taken in interpreting the results when such methods are employed.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=1354-523X&site=1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofOral diseasesen_US
dc.subject.meshAdulten_US
dc.subject.meshBiological Markersen_US
dc.subject.meshElectrolytes - Analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshGlycoproteins - Analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshGossypiumen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshHydrogen-Ion Concentrationen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshParaffinen_US
dc.subject.meshPolypropylenesen_US
dc.subject.meshReproducibility Of Resultsen_US
dc.subject.meshSaliva - Chemistry - Secretionen_US
dc.subject.meshSalivary Proteins And Peptides - Analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshSpecimen Handling - Instrumentation - Methodsen_US
dc.titleNewer saliva collection methods and saliva composition: a study of two Salivette kits.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailSamaranayake, LP:lakshman@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authoritySamaranayake, LP=rp00023en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.pmid7553391-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0029316237en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros9094-
dc.identifier.hkuros3576-
dc.identifier.volume1en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.spage86en_US
dc.identifier.epage91en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLenanderLumikari, M=7003887944en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridJohansson, I=7102079367en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridVilja, P=7003805228en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSamaranayake, LP=7102761002en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats