ArticlePloS one2021
Proteome difference among the salivary proteins adsorbed onto metallic orthodontic brackets and hydroxyapatite discs.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current approaches to produce durable biomaterials: Trends in polymeric materials for restorative dentistry applications.Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2024Review
- Salivary peptidome analysis and protease prediction during orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effects of Magnesium Oxide Nanoparticles Incorporation on Shear Bond Strength and Antibacterial Activity of an Orthodontic Composite: An In Vitro Study.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the atomic composition and the proteome of the salivary proteins adsorbed on the surface of orthodontic metallic bracket. For this, the atomic composition of orthodontic metallic brackets was analyzed with X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS). The acquired bracket pellicle was characterized after brackets were immersed in human whole saliva supernatant for 2 hours at 37°C. Hydroxyapatite (HA) discs were used as a control. Acquired pellicle was harvested from the HA discs (n = 12) and from the metallic brackets (n = 12). Proteomics based on mass spectrometry technology was used for salivary protein identification and characterization. Results showed that most of the proteins adsorbed on the surface of orthodontic metallic brackets and on the HA discs were identified specifically to each group, indicating a small overlapping between the salivary proteins on each study group. A total of 311 proteins present on the HA discs were unique to this group while 253 proteins were unique to metallic brackets, and only 45 proteins were common to the two groups. Even though most proteins were unique to each study group, proteins related to antimicrobial activity, lubrication, and remineralization were present in both groups. These findings demonstrate that the salivary proteins adsorbed on the bracket surface are dependent on the material molecular composition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.