ABSTRACT
Objective: The aim of the current study was to carry out a preliminary validation of devices
for standardized collection of whole mouth fluid (WMF) in comparison to the passive
drooling method for protein analysis in healthy subjects.Materials and Methods: A carefully designed sample collection/pretreatment protocol is crucial to the success
of any saliva proteomics project. In this study, WMF was collected from healthy volunteers
(n = 10, ages: 18–26 years). Individuals with any oral disease were excluded from the
study group. In our study, we evaluated the following collection methods; the classical
passive drooling method (unstimulated whole saliva) and standardized tools for saliva
collection (Pure·SAL™, and RNAPro·SAL™) from Oasis Diagnostics® Corporation (Vancouver WA, USA). For estimation of protein levels, we used the bicinchoninic
acid assay and protein assay kit (Thermo Fisher). The two-dimensional gel electrophoresis
sample analysis was carried out for the estimation of proteins in one of the samples.Results: When gels were compared, the difference was seen in the resolution of spots. Protein
spots were fading from high- to low-molecular weight masses. Hence, advanced devices
in comparison to spitting method resulted in much clearer protein spots which in turn
prove the validation of devices.Conclusions: In this study, we concluded that protein extraction could be possible by both methods
such as passive drooling method and through advanced saliva collection devices (Pure·SAL™
and RNAPro·SAL™).
Key words:
Gel electrophoresis and dentistry - proteins - proteomics - saliva