AIMS: Caries is a multifactor disease, and impaired stimulated salivary flow rate and buffering capacity are the best-known risk factors. The salivary flow rate, pH, buffering capacity and DMFT (decayed, missing and filled teeth) index of adult hemodialysis patients were compared with those of healthy controls. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-two (34 F, 38 M, mean age: 45.05 +/- 14.15 years) hemodialysis patients and 50 (26 F, 24 M, mean age: 43.92 +/- 18.80 years) control saliva were collected after prestimulation and expressed as ml/min. Salivary pH and buffering capacity were measured (Ericsson method). The dental examinations were performed according to WHO criteria and DMFT index was calculated. Statistical analysis was performed with Student t-test and Pearson correlation test. RESULTS: The patients' mean salivary flow rate was 0.69 +/- 0.31 ml/min, pH, 8.15 +/- 0.72, buffering capacity, 6.83 +/- 0.71 and DMFT index was 11.91 +/- 8.73. The salivary flow rate was less than the controls (p <0.001), but salivary pH and buffering capacity were higher (both p < 0.001). There was no difference in DMFT index between groups (p > 0.05). There was no significantly negative correlation between DMFT index and stimulated salivary flow rate, pH but there was a positive correlation with buffering capacity (r = 0.286, p < 0.05) in the patients. Moreover, there was no significantly positive correlation between stimulated salivary flow rate and pH buffering capacity in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary flow rate of hemodialysis patients was less than the hyposalivary limit. Salivary pH and buffering capacity were both above the reference values, but DMFT index of hemodialysis patients did not differ from that of controls. However, caries and related dental infections may lead to serious problems in infection-prone hemodialysis patients, so these patients should have regular dental examinations and careful treatments.
AIMS: Caries is a multifactor disease, and impaired stimulated salivary flow rate and buffering capacity are the best-known risk factors. The salivary flow rate, pH, buffering capacity and DMFT (decayed, missing and filled teeth) index of adult hemodialysis patients were compared with those of healthy controls. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-two (34 F, 38 M, mean age: 45.05 +/- 14.15 years) hemodialysis patients and 50 (26 F, 24 M, mean age: 43.92 +/- 18.80 years) control saliva were collected after prestimulation and expressed as ml/min. Salivary pH and buffering capacity were measured (Ericsson method). The dental examinations were performed according to WHO criteria and DMFT index was calculated. Statistical analysis was performed with Student t-test and Pearson correlation test. RESULTS: The patients' mean salivary flow rate was 0.69 +/- 0.31 ml/min, pH, 8.15 +/- 0.72, buffering capacity, 6.83 +/- 0.71 and DMFT index was 11.91 +/- 8.73. The salivary flow rate was less than the controls (p <0.001), but salivary pH and buffering capacity were higher (both p < 0.001). There was no difference in DMFT index between groups (p > 0.05). There was no significantly negative correlation between DMFT index and stimulated salivary flow rate, pH but there was a positive correlation with buffering capacity (r = 0.286, p < 0.05) in the patients. Moreover, there was no significantly positive correlation between stimulated salivary flow rate and pH buffering capacity in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary flow rate of hemodialysis patients was less than the hyposalivary limit. Salivary pH and buffering capacity were both above the reference values, but DMFT index of hemodialysis patients did not differ from that of controls. However, caries and related dental infections may lead to serious problems in infection-prone hemodialysis patients, so these patients should have regular dental examinations and careful treatments.
Authors: Marcia Rejane Thomas Canabarro Andrade; Lívia Azeredo Alves Antunes; Rosangela Maria de Araújo Soares; Anna Theresa Tome Leão; Luciane Cople Maia; Laura Guimarães Primo Journal: Pediatr Nephrol Date: 2013-04-18 Impact factor: 3.714
Authors: Mohammed S Al-Ak'hali; Esam S Halboub; Osama H Mujam; Noor M Alahmar; Salehah A Jerah; Fahad A Mutawwam Journal: Saudi Med J Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: R Ausavarungnirun; S Wisetsin; N Rongkiettechakorn; S Chaichalermsak; U Udompol; M Rattanasompattikul Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-07-27 Impact factor: 2.692