Safety and In Situ Antierosive Effect of CaneCPI-5 on Dental Enamel

Safety and In Situ Antierosive Effect of CaneCPI-5 on Dental Enamel

The sugarcane cystatin (CaneCPI-5) was recently cloned and showed strong binding force to dental enamel and protection against initial erosion. However, evaluations on its safety and efficacy in a situation closer to the clinical condition are necessary. In the present study we analyzed 1) the cytot...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of dental research Vol. 100; no. 12; pp. 1344 - 1350
Main Authors: Pelá, V.T., Lunardelli, J.G.Q., Tokuhara, C.K., Gironda, C.C., Silva, N.D.G., Carvalho, T.S., Santiago, A.C., Souza, B.M., Moraes, S.M., Henrique-Silva, F., Magalhães, A.C., Oliveira, R.C., Buzalaf, M.A.R.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01-11-2021
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Subjects:
Abrasion
Animals
Cattle
Cell viability
Citric acid
Clinical trials
Confocal microscopy
Cross-Over Studies
Cystatins
Cytotoxicity
Dental Enamel
Fibroblasts
Humans
Mitochondria
Tooth Abrasion
Tooth Erosion - chemically induced
Tooth Erosion - prevention & control
Tooth Wear
Toothbrushing
Variance analysis
saliva
erosion
fibroblast
tooth wear
cystatins
prevention
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The sugarcane cystatin (CaneCPI-5) was recently cloned and showed strong binding force to dental enamel and protection against initial erosion. However, evaluations on its safety and efficacy in a situation closer to the clinical condition are necessary. In the present study we analyzed 1) the cytotoxicity of CaneCPI-5 on human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs); 2) the ability of CaneCPI-5 to reduce enamel erosion and erosion+abrasion in situ. In part 1, HGFs were treated with CaneCPI-5 (0.025, 0.05, 0.1, 0.5 or 1.0 mg/mL) or no treatment (control). The cytotoxicity was assessed after 60 s and 24 h by mitochondrial activity (MTT), confocal microscopy, and hematoxylin/eosin staining. In part 2, 15 volunteers participated in a double-blind crossover protocol consisting of 3 phases, according to the following treatments: 1) 0.1 mg/mL CaneCPI-5; 2) SnCl2/NaF/AmF (Elmex; positive control); 3) water (negative control). The volunteers wore an appliance containing 4 bovine enamel specimens for 5 d. Each day, the specimens were individually treated with 50 µL of the tested solutions per 60 s and then subjected to erosive challenges (0.1% citric acid, pH 2.5, for 90 s, 4 times per day). After the first and last erosive challenge each day, 2 samples were abraded (toothbrushing, 15 s). Enamel wear was measured by contact profilometry. One or two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)/Tukey’s or Sidak’s tests (P < 0.05) were applied. Regardless of the concentration and the experimental time, CaneCPI-5 did not decrease the cell viability compared to the negative control (P < 0.05). Erosion+abrasion led to significantly greater wear compared to erosion only. For both conditions, the lowest wear was found for SnCl2 and CaneCPI-5, which did not differ significantly from each other, but showed significant protection when compared to the negative control. In conclusion, CaneCPI-5 is safe on HGFs and reduces enamel erosive wear to the same extent as a commercial solution used to control erosive tooth wear (ETW).
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0022-0345
1544-0591
DOI:10.1177/00220345211011590