Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2021
Stimulated whole salivary flow rate: The most appropriate technique for assessing salivary flow in Sjögren syndrome.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alvariño C, Bagan L, Murillo-Cortes J, Calvo J, Bagan J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the most appropriate method for measuring salivary flow to aid the diagnosis of Sjögren's syndrome (SS). Specifically, we compared the unstimulated whole salivary flow rate (UWSFR) with the stimulated whole salivary flow rate (SWSFR).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This case-control study comprised one group of 103 patients with SS and a control group of 50 healthy people. We measured the UWSFR and SWSFR in both groups according to the guidelines established by Navacet [1993].
RESULTS: The UWSFR and SWSFR were significantly lower in the patient group compared with the controls (p < 0.01). Among the participants in the patient group, we found a decreased UWSFR in 84 individuals (81.5%) and a decreased SWSFR in 90 individuals (87.4%). We encountered difficulties obtaining saliva in 37 (35.9%) patients during the UWSFR test, and in 12 (11.7%) patients during the SWSFR test. There was no significant statistical difference in the UWSFR or SWSFR between patients with primary and secondary SS.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the UWSFR, the SWSFR is a more suitable and effective method for measuring salivary flow in patients with SS, as well as for qualitative analysis of the obtained saliva.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This case-control study comprised one group of 103 patients with SS and a control group of 50 healthy people. We measured the UWSFR and SWSFR in both groups according to the guidelines established by Navacet [1993].
RESULTS: The UWSFR and SWSFR were significantly lower in the patient group compared with the controls (p < 0.01). Among the participants in the patient group, we found a decreased UWSFR in 84 individuals (81.5%) and a decreased SWSFR in 90 individuals (87.4%). We encountered difficulties obtaining saliva in 37 (35.9%) patients during the UWSFR test, and in 12 (11.7%) patients during the SWSFR test. There was no significant statistical difference in the UWSFR or SWSFR between patients with primary and secondary SS.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the UWSFR, the SWSFR is a more suitable and effective method for measuring salivary flow in patients with SS, as well as for qualitative analysis of the obtained saliva.