Characterization of saliva in immunocompromised patients and tobacco users: A case-control study

Objective: The aim of the study was to assess salivary flow rate, salivary pH, and salivary albumin concentration in systemically compromised subjects and tobacco users and its comparison to healthy controls. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients were selected and then were equally divided into syst...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Indian journal of dental research 2019-11, Vol.30 (6), p.909-914
Main Authors: Rani, Abha, Panchaksharappa, Mamatha, Chandrashekarappa, Neetha, Annigeri, Rajeshwari, Kanjani, Varsha
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Age
Albumin
Analysis
Angiotensin II
BCG
Diabetes
Homeostasis
Hypertension
Immunocompromised host
Immunocompromised hosts
modified schirmer test (mst)
Mouth
Patients
pH effects
Radiation therapy
Saliva
salivary albumin
salivary flow
salivary ph
Systemic diseases
Tobacco
Variance analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective: The aim of the study was to assess salivary flow rate, salivary pH, and salivary albumin concentration in systemically compromised subjects and tobacco users and its comparison to healthy controls. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients were selected and then were equally divided into systemically compromised group, tobacco users, and control group with 20 in each group. Saliva flow rate was assessed using modified Schirmer test (MST), salivary pH was estimated by pH meter, and salivary albumin concentration was determined using bromocresol green method. Results: The salivary flow rate readings measured by MST were 22.65 ± 2.79, 22.6 ± 3.57, and 33.22 ± 2.30 mm/3min in systemically compromised individuals, tobacco users, and control group, respectively (P < 0.001). The salivary pH was 6.80 ± 0.24, 6.81 ± 0.25, and 7.18 ± 0.17 in systemically compromised subjects, tobacco users, and control group, respectively (P < 0.001). The salivary albumin concentration was 2.49 ± 0.61, 0.73 ± 0.13, and 1.14 ± 0.12 g/dl in systemically compromised subjects, tobacco users, and control group, respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusion: MST can be routinely used as chair-side investigation to evaluate salivary flow which is objective, inexpensive, easy-to-perform, and patient-friendly. The salivary flow rate, salivary pH, and salivary albumin level in systemically compromised subjects, tobacco users, and normal individuals showed significant differences.
ISSN:0970-9290
1998-3603
DOI:10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_642_18