Formulation and Evaluation of Saliva Substitute

Year : 2024 | Volume : 11 | Issue : 03 | Page : 32 47
    By

    Sudipta Roy,

  1. Associate Professor, Department of Pharmaceutics, Bengal College of Pharmaceutical Technology, Dubrajpur, West Bengal, India

Abstract

The development and evaluation of saliva substitutes play a vital role in managing xerostomia, a condition marked by insufficient saliva production that adversely affects oral health and overall well-being. This study investigates various formulations of saliva substitutes intended to replicate the functionality of natural saliva. The key goals are to assess their moisturizing effectiveness, physical and chemical properties, and in vitro performance. These formulations generally incorporate hydrators, lubricants, thickeners, and pH regulators to simulate the natural oral environment. Evaluation metrics include viscosity, texture, consistency, spreadability, adhesion, pH balance, and stability. Additionally, in vitro tests are conducted to measure the release and diffusion of active ingredients, mimicking their behavior in the oral cavity. Results reveal significant variability in the effectiveness of saliva substitutes, influenced by formulation and testing parameters. Effective substitutes must provide adequate hydration and lubrication, be compatible with oral tissues, and maintain stability while closely imitating natural saliva. The study underscores the need for continuous improvement and thorough evaluation of saliva substitutes to enhance their performance and user satisfaction. Future research should aim at refining formulations to better meet the needs of individuals with xerostomia and improve the clinical efficacy of these products.

Keywords: Saliva Substitute, Human saliva, xerostomia, salivary gland hypofunction (SGH), The Clinical Oral Dryness Score.

[This article belongs to Research & Reviews: A Journal of Drug Formulation, Development and Production ]

How to cite this article:
Sudipta Roy. Formulation and Evaluation of Saliva Substitute. Research & Reviews: A Journal of Drug Formulation, Development and Production. 2024; 11(03):32-47.
How to cite this URL:
Sudipta Roy. Formulation and Evaluation of Saliva Substitute. Research & Reviews: A Journal of Drug Formulation, Development and Production. 2024; 11(03):32-47. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/rrjodfdp/article=2024/view=180315


References

1. Kim YJ. Xerostomia and its cellular targets. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(5358).

2. Hu J, Andablo-Reyes E, Mighell A, Pavitt S, Sarkar A. Dry mouth diagnosis and saliva substitutes—A review from a textural perspective. J Texture Stud. 2021;52(141–156).

3. Cassolato SF, Turnbull RS. Xerostomia: clinical aspects and treatment. Gerodontology. 2003;20(2):64-77.

4. Tanasiewicz M, Hildebrandt T, Obersztyn I. Xerostomia of various etiologies: A review of the literature. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2016;25(199–206).

5. Humphrey SP, Williamson RT. A review of saliva: Normal composition, flow, and function. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;85(2):162-169. doi:10.1067/mpr.2001.113778.

6. Sarkar A, Xu F, Lee S. Human saliva and model saliva at bulk to adsorbed phases—Similarities and differences. Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 2019;273:102034.

7. Ozdemir T, Fowler EW, Hao Y, Ravikrishnan A, Harrington DA, Witt RL, et al. Biomaterials-based strategies for salivary gland tissue regeneration. Biomater Sci. 2016;4(592–604).

8. Gittings S, Turnbull N, Henry B, Roberts CJ, Gershkovich P. Characterisation of human saliva as a platform for oral dissolution medium development. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2015;91(16–24).

9. Carpenter G. Artificial salivas. Clin Dent Rev. 2018;2(24). 10. Guggenheimer J, Moore PA. Xerostomia: etiology, recognition, and treatment. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134(61–69).

11. Iorgulescu G. Saliva between normal and pathological. Important factors in determining systemic and oral health. J Med Life. 2009;2(303–307).

12. Malicka B, AfU-K, Skoskiewicz-Malinowska K. Prevalence of xerostomia and the salivary flow rate in diabetic patients. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2014;23(225–233).

13. Edgar WM. Saliva: its secretion, composition and functions. Br Dent J. 1992;172(305–312).

14. Bain CA, Solomons LR. Saliva composition and its role in oral health. J Dent Res. 2021;100(8):1053-1060. doi:10.1177/00220345211000112.

15. Anne Marie Lynge Pedersen, Daniel Belstrøm, The role of natural salivary defences in maintaining a healthy oral microbiota, Journal of Dentistry, Volume 80, Supplement 1, 2019, Pages S3-S12, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.08.010.

16. Sreebny LM, Schwartz SS. Xerostomia: diagnosis and management. Am J Med. 1997;103(6):151-159. doi:10.1016/S0002-9343(97)00204-8.

17. Dawes C. Circadian rhythms in human salivary flow rate and composition. J Physiol. 1972;220(3):529-45.

18. Pechersky E, Sreenivasan PK. Development and evaluation of a new saliva substitute. J Oral Rehabil. 2005;32(7):511-520. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01460.x.

19. Lentner C. Composition of saliva and its role in oral health. In: Saliva: Clinical and Laboratory Aspects. New York: Springer; 1999. p. 45-60.

20. Mack L, Goss A, Fehrmann H. The formulation of artificial saliva substitutes: An overview. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(5):731-738. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.09.021.

21. Sharma P, Tandon S, Singh V, Agarwal A. Methodology for evaluating saliva substitutes: An overview. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2016;10(1):43-49. doi:10.15171/joddd.2016.008.

22. Dost F, Farah CS. Stimulating the discussion on saliva substitutes: a clinical perspective. Aust Dent J. 2013;58(1):11-7.

23. Miller Kielbassa AM, Shohadai SP, Schulte-Mönting J. Effect of saliva substitutes on mineral content of demineralized and sound dental enamel. Support Care Cancer. 2001;9:40-7.

24. Herod EL. The use of milk as a saliva substitute. J Public Health Dent. 1994;54(3):184-9. 25. Smith G, Smith AJ, Shaw L, Shaw MJ. Artificial saliva substitutes and mineral dissolution. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28(8):728-31.

26. Wiener RC, Wu B, Crout R, Wiener M, Plassman B, Kao E, et al. Hyposalivation and xerostomia in dentate older adults. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010;141(3):279-284. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0161.

27. Vissink A, Panders AK, Vermey A, Petersen JK, Visch LL, Schaub RM. A clinical comparison between commercially available mucin-and CMC-containing saliva substitutes. Int J Oral Surg. 1983;12(4):232-8.

28. Baker KL, Nieberg LG, Weimer AD, Hanna M. Frictional changes in force values caused by saliva substitution. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987;91(4):316-20.

29. Vissink A, Waterman HA, ‘s‐Gravenmade EJ, Panders AK, Vermey A. Rheological properties of saliva substitutes containing mucin, carboxymethylcellulose or polyethylenoxide. J Oral Pathol Med. 1984;13(1):22-8.

30. Mateu-Gelabert P, Jessell L, Goodbody E, Kim D, Gile K, Teubl J, et al. High enhancer, downer, withdrawal helper: multifunctional nonmedical benzodiazepine use among young adult opioid users in New York City. Int J Drug Policy. 2017;46:17-27. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.05.016.

Regular Issue Subscription Original Research
Volume 11
Issue 03
Received 22/07/2024
Accepted 14/10/2024
Published 26/10/2024
435

Login


My IP

PlumX Metrics