ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Detection of serum amyloid A in Saliva of patients with internal carotid artery stenosis: a pilot study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine whether serum amyloid A (SAA) is detectable in saliva of patients with internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis and to investigate the relationship between salivary and serum SAA levels across the perioperative period of carotid endarterectomy (CEA). MATERIALS AND
methodsSix patients with asymptomatic ICA stenosis (60-99%) undergoing CEA were enrolled. Periodontal status was assessed at enrolment and used to characterise the cohort and document potential oral inflammatory confounding of salivary SAA. Salivary and serum SAA, C-reactive protein (CRP), and lipid parameters were measured before CEA, on postoperative day 2, and 30-45 days postoperatively using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and standard laboratory methods.
resultsSAA was detectable in all saliva samples. Serum SAA increased after surgery and did not decline at follow-up, whereas salivary SAA showed a progressive decline (repeated measures ANOVA: F(2,4) = 25.01, p = 0.005). A strong negative correlation was observed between changes in serum and salivary SAA (Pearson's r = - 0.976, p = 0.004).
conclusionsIn this small pilot cohort, SAA was detectable in all saliva samples, and salivary concentrations decreased across the perioperative time points while serum SAA did not show a parallel decline. The observed inverse serum-saliva association should be interpreted cautiously given the very small sample size, absence of a control group, and potential oral and sampling confounders. These findings support the feasibility of measuring salivary SAA in this clinical setting and warrant confirmation in larger controlled studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42828683What 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.