RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Various formulations of artificial saliva are present in the literature and little guidance is available on the standardization of type of saliva for use in in vitro protocols for erosive studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the remineralizing capacity of different formulations of artificial saliva on initial enamel erosive lesion. METHODS: Bovine enamel blocks were subjected to short-term acidic exposure by immersion in citric acid 0.05 M (pH 2.5) for 15s, resulting in surface softening without tissue loss. Then 90 selected eroded enamel blocks were randomly and equally divided into 6 groups according to saliva formulation (n=15): Saliva 1 (contain mucin); Saliva 2 (Saliva 1 without mucin); Saliva 3; Saliva 4; Saliva 5 (contain sodium carboxymethyl cellulose) and control (C) (deionized water). After demineralization enamel blocks were subjected to remineralization by immersion in the saliva's formulations for 2h. Enamel remineralization was measured by superficial hardness test (% superficial hardness change). The data were tested using ANOVA and Tukey's test (p<0.05). RESULTS: All the tested formulations of artificial saliva resulted in significantly higher enamel remineralization compared to control (p<0.001). Saliva 3 showed higher percentage of enamel remineralization than Saliva 5 (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Besides the variety of artificial saliva for erosion in vitro protocols, all the formulations tested were able to partially remineralize initial erosive lesions.