The effect of antacid on salivary pH in patients with and without dental erosion after multiple acid challenges.
The effect of antacid on salivary pH in patients with and without dental erosion after multiple acid challenges.
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015-04
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
Sarah Dhuhair;J. Dennison;P. Yaman;G. Neiva
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sarah Dhuhair;J. Dennison;P. Yaman;G. Neiva
目的评价抗酸剂对口腔酸蚀患者唾液pH值的影响，并监测口腔酸蚀患者和非口腔酸蚀患者多次酸激试验后唾液pH值的变化。方法根据纳入/排除标准，选择20例牙侵蚀患者和20例健康对照者，年龄、性别相匹配。使用唾液检查系统对唾液pH值、缓冲能力和唾液流速进行基线测量。受试者每隔10分钟用百事可乐漱口三次。使用数字pH计以0分钟、5分钟和10分钟的间隔以及第三次漱口后每5分钟监测pH的变化，直至pH恢复基线值或45分钟复发。在第二次访视时重复漱口方案，然后用无糖液体抗酸剂（Mylanta Supreme）漱口。还记录了恢复时间。使用独立t检验、重复测量ANOVA和Fisher精确检验（α= 0.05）分析数据。结果两组基线缓冲能力和流速无显著差异（分别为P= 0.542; P= 0.2831）。两组之间的基线唾液pH值相似（P= 0.721）。糜烂组和非糜烂组在多次酸挑战（P= 0.695）或抗酸中和（P= 0.861）时唾液pH值无显著差异。唾液pH恢复时间的分析显示，在酸挑战（P= 0.091）或使用抗酸剂（P= 0.118）后，组间无显著差异。第2天，两组的生存曲线存在高度显著差异，非糜烂组的消退速度显著快于糜烂组（P= 0.0086）。
PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of antacid swish in the salivary pH values and to monitor the pH changes in subjects with and without dental erosion after multiple acid challenge tests. METHODS 20 subjects with tooth erosion were matched in age and gender with 20 healthy controls according to specific inclusion/exclusion criteria. Baseline measures were taken of salivary pH, buffering capacity and salivary flow rate using the Saliva Check System. Subjects swished with Diet Pepsi three times at 10-minute intervals. Changes in pH were monitored using a digital pH meter at 0-, 5-, and 10- minute intervals and at every 5 minutes after the third swish until pH resumed baseline value or 45 minutes relapse. Swishing regimen was repeated on a second visit, followed by swishing with sugar-free liquid antacid (Mylanta Supreme). Recovery times were also recorded. Data was analyzed using independent t-tests, repeated measures ANOVA, and Fisher's exact test (α= 0.05). RESULTS Baseline buffering capacity and flow rate were not significantly different between groups (P= 0.542; P= 0.2831, respectively). Baseline salivary pH values were similar between groups (P= 0.721). No significant differences in salivary pH values were found between erosion and non-erosion groups in response to multiple acid challenges (P= 0.695) or antacid neutralization (P= 0.861). Analysis of salivary pH recovery time revealed no significant differences between groups after acid challenges (P= 0.091) or after the use of antacid (P= 0.118). There was a highly significant difference in the survival curves of the two groups on Day 2, with the non-erosion group resolving significantly faster than the erosion group (P= 0.0086).