IADR Abstract Archives
Acquired Enamel Pellicle Engineering With a New Cystatin From MaquiBerry
Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the modification of the protein composition of the acquired enamel pellicle (AEP) formed in vivo after rinsing with a new cystatin derived from Maqui Berry (MaquiCPI-3).
Methods: Nine volunteers were selected for the study. The acquired pellicle engineering procedures followed a crossover and double-blind in vivo protocol. For this, the volunteers underwent pumice stone prophylaxis. Then, they rinsed (10 ml, 1 min) with one of the following treatment solutions: Deionized water (negative control), Elmex® Erosion Protection (positive control), or 0.5 mg/mL MaquiCPI-3. After treatment, the AEP was formed for 120 min. Subsequently, the AEP was collected using an electrode filter paper (5 x 10mm) pre-soaked in 3% citric acid. After protein extraction, samples were analyzed by quantitative shotgun label-free proteomics (nanoLC-ESI-MS/MS).
Results: Ninety-seven proteins were identified, among which 42 proteins are typically found in the AEP. Furthermore, 26 proteins were identified in common among all groups, being 19 proteins typically found in the AEP. Regarding the proteins differentially expressed, several acid-resistant proteins were increased in the Elmex® and MaquiCPI-3 groups compared to the water group. For the comparison Elmex® vs. Water, 22 increased proteins were upregulated (among them: Cystatin, Protein S100, Lysozyme, Immunoglobulin) in the first. As for the comparison MaquiCPI-3 vs. Water, 21 proteins were upregulated in the first, such as Cystatin, Statherin, Protein S100, Lysozyme, Immunoglobulin). Finally, in the comparison between MaquiCPI-3 vs. Elmex®, 9 proteins were upregulated in the first, such as Hemoglobin).
Conclusions: In conclusion, acquired pellicle engineering with MaquiCPI-3 increased several acid-resistant proteins in this integument, which may contribute to protection against caries and erosive tooth wear.
Methods: Nine volunteers were selected for the study. The acquired pellicle engineering procedures followed a crossover and double-blind in vivo protocol. For this, the volunteers underwent pumice stone prophylaxis. Then, they rinsed (10 ml, 1 min) with one of the following treatment solutions: Deionized water (negative control), Elmex® Erosion Protection (positive control), or 0.5 mg/mL MaquiCPI-3. After treatment, the AEP was formed for 120 min. Subsequently, the AEP was collected using an electrode filter paper (5 x 10mm) pre-soaked in 3% citric acid. After protein extraction, samples were analyzed by quantitative shotgun label-free proteomics (nanoLC-ESI-MS/MS).
Results: Ninety-seven proteins were identified, among which 42 proteins are typically found in the AEP. Furthermore, 26 proteins were identified in common among all groups, being 19 proteins typically found in the AEP. Regarding the proteins differentially expressed, several acid-resistant proteins were increased in the Elmex® and MaquiCPI-3 groups compared to the water group. For the comparison Elmex® vs. Water, 22 increased proteins were upregulated (among them: Cystatin, Protein S100, Lysozyme, Immunoglobulin) in the first. As for the comparison MaquiCPI-3 vs. Water, 21 proteins were upregulated in the first, such as Cystatin, Statherin, Protein S100, Lysozyme, Immunoglobulin). Finally, in the comparison between MaquiCPI-3 vs. Elmex®, 9 proteins were upregulated in the first, such as Hemoglobin).
Conclusions: In conclusion, acquired pellicle engineering with MaquiCPI-3 increased several acid-resistant proteins in this integument, which may contribute to protection against caries and erosive tooth wear.