Influence of Sampling Conditions, Salivary Flow, and Total Protein Content in Uric Acid Measurements in Saliva.

Jorge M González-Hernández,Asta Tvarijonaviciute,Gonzalo Márquez,Lorena Franco,David Colomer-Poveda,José J Cerón,Pedro Jimenez-Reyes,Silvia Martinez-Subiela,Luis M Martínez-Aranda,Ramón Cugat

doi:10.3390/antiox8090389

Jorge M González-Hernández, Asta Tvarijonaviciute + Show 8 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox8090389

Copy DOI

Abstract

Uric acid (UA) is the most abundant antioxidant compound in saliva and one of the most sensitive biomarkers for detecting changes in the oxidative status of the organism. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of: (i) different methods of saliva sampling and (ii) the correction by salivary flow or total protein on UA concentrations in saliva. Paired saliva (collected by two different methods, passive drooling and using Salivette cotton rolls) and serum samples were obtained from 12 healthy men after the performance of two resistance training exercises of different level of effort that can produce different concentrations in UA in saliva. There were no significant differences between values of uric acid in saliva using Salivette and passive drool. Correlations between UA in serum and saliva and increases in UA in saliva after exercise were detected when saliva samples were obtained by passive drool and Salivette and were not corrected by salivary flow or total protein concentration. Therefore for UA measurements in saliva it would not be recommended to normalize the results by salivary flow or protein concentration. This study highlights the importance of choosing an adequate sampling method selection as well as the expression of results when analytes are measured in saliva.

Highlights

Saliva, as a sample where different biomarkers which can be measured, has attracted attention of the scientific community in recent years
Significant increases in Uric acid (UA) concentration without any correction were found at 60 min after the to failure (TF) protocol with the two tested sampling methods (Salivette, p = 0.017 and passive drool, p = 0.021)
When values were corrected by salivary flow, an increase at 60 min was found after the TF protocol with the same two sampling methods (Salivette, p = 0.032 and passive drool, p = 0.01)

Summary

Introduction

As a sample where different biomarkers which can be measured, has attracted attention of the scientific community in recent years. The easy and painless collection are the main advantages of using saliva compared to serum use. It is a non-invasive procedure allowing its use in field conditions and repeated sampling [1], producing minimum discomfort and anxiety. Saliva has an antioxidant system consisting of various metabolites and enzymes [2]. For this reason, saliva has been used to investigate possible changes in the oxidative status associated with different conditions, such as oral diseases [3,4], systemic diseases (e.g., diabetes [5] or renal failure [6]), and physical efforts [7]. Uric acid (UA) is the most important antioxidant molecule in saliva, contributing

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion