RESUMEN
Background: To date, little is known about the salivary mucosal immune response following different COVID-19 vaccine types or after a booster (3rd) dose of the BNT162b2 (BNT) vaccine. Methods: A total of 301 saliva samples were collected from vaccinated individuals and arranged into two cohorts: cohort 1 (n = 145), samples from individuals who had received two doses against SARS-CoV-2; cohort 2 (n = 156), samples from individuals who had received a booster of BNT vaccine. Cohorts 1 and 2 were sub-stratified into three groups based on the types of first and second doses (homologous BNT/BNT, homologous ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1, or heterologous BNT/ChAdOx1vaccinations). Salivary immunoglobulin G (IgG) response to SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein was measured by ELISA, and clinical demographic data were collected from hospital records or questionnaires. Results: Salivary IgG antibody responses against different vaccines, whether homologous or heterogeneous vaccination regimens, showed similar levels in cohorts 1 and 2. Compiling all groups in cohort 1 and 2 showed significant, albeit weak, negative correlations between salivary IgG levels and time (r = -0.2, p = 0.03; r = -0.27, p = 0.003, respectively). In cohort 2, the durability of salivary IgG after a booster dose of BNT162b2 significantly dropped after 3 months compared to the <1 month and 1-3 months groups. Conclusions: Different COVID-19 vaccine types and regimens elicit similar salivary anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG with modest waning over time. Boosting with BNT162b2 vaccine did not produce an evident increase in mucosal IgG response whereby COVID-19 recovered subjects show higher salivary IgG than naive, post-vaccination subjects. The ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1 regimen showed better correlation between salivary IgG levels and durability. These findings highlight the importance of developing oral or intra-nasal vaccines to induce stronger mucosal immunity.
RESUMEN
The aim was to investigate in vitro the fracture resistance (FR) of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with conservative access cavity restored using various direct and indirect restorative materials and techniques. Seventy-two mandibular first molars were equally divided into six groups. Teeth in Group 1 were untreated (controls). In Groups 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, teeth were restored with amalgam, composite resin, ceramic inlay, ceramic onlay and zirconium crown, respectively. A fracture test was performed on all teeth using a static load. Compared with other groups, teeth in Groups 3 (P < 0.05) and 6 (P < 0.05) had the highest FR values with no significant difference in-between them. Teeth in Group 4 had the lowest FR than other groups (P < 0.05). All restorative techniques tested led to a significant reduction in FR. It is necessary to consider type of fracture when evaluating fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Crowned molars had the highest favourable fractures among the five treatment groups. Although the results of this in vitro study showed variations between tested techniques in ETT with a conservative access cavity, further long-term controlled clinical trials are required to confirm these in vitro findings.
