Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Apr 26;16(4):e0250822. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250822

Beyond dissolution: Xerostomia rinses affect composition and structure of biomimetic dental mineral in vitro

Mikayla M Moynahan 1,#, Stephanie L Wong 1,#, Alix C Deymier 1,*
Editor: Oscar Millet2
PMCID: PMC8075190  PMID: 33901259

Abstract

Xerostomia, known as dry mouth, is caused by decreased salivary flow. Treatment with lubricating oral rinses provides temporary relief of dry mouth discomfort; however, it remains unclear how their composition affects mineralized dental tissues. Therefore, the objective of this study was to analyze the effects of common components in xerostomia oral rinses on biomimetic apatite with varying carbonate contents. Carbonated apatite was synthesized and exposed to one of the following solutions for 72 hours at varying pHs: water-based, phosphorus-containing (PBS), mucin-like containing (MLC), or fluoride-containing (FC) solutions. Post-exposure results indicated that apatite mass decreased irrespective of pH and solution composition, while solution buffering was pH dependent. Raman and X-ray diffraction analysis showed that the addition of phosphorus, mucin-like molecules, and fluoride in solution decreases mineral carbonate levels and changed the lattice spacing and crystallinity of bioapatite, indicative of dissolution/recrystallization processes. The mineral recrystallized into a less-carbonated apatite in the PBS and MLC solutions, and into fluorapatite in FC. Tap water did not affect the apatite lattice structure suggesting formation of a labile carbonate surface layer on apatite. These results reveal that solution composition can have varied and complex effects on dental mineral beyond dissolution, which can have long term consequences on mineral solubility and mechanics. Therefore, clinicians should consider these factors when advising treatments for xerostomia patients.

Introduction

Xerostomia, commonly known as dry mouth, is a symptom caused by decreased salivary flow [1] that affects up to 64.8% of people depending on the selected population [24]. It is caused by a multitude of etiologies including medications, cancer treatments, and systemic diseases [1]. Xerostomia patients often suffer discomfort, dysphagia, irritations in mucosa, and considerable increased risk of caries and demineralization of the dental tissues [1, 57]. This increased caries risk is associated with changes in salivary quantity and composition; including decreased salivary pH and buffering capacity [1, 8, 9]. These compositional changes impede saliva’s ability to neutralize acidic metabolites made by oral bacteria [7, 10] and increase dissolution of enamel and dentin [1, 11]. The healthy equilibrium of the oral environment becomes compromised due to these changes in salivary flow rate, composition, and pH.

The goals of most xerostomia treatments are to (1) relieve the sensation of dry mouth and (2) protect dentition from demineralization. Oral rinses are currently among the most commonly recommended treatments for xerostomia and use a number of compositional tools to fulfill the treatment goals. These include the use of an aqueous base and/or mucins and large lubricating molecules to provide a comfortable mouth feel, as well as high phosphate levels and/or fluoride doping to minimize dissolution. Overall, some ingredients in these rinses have been shown to provide temporary symptom relief of dry mouth [12, 13]. Numerous studies have investigated the effects of such oral rinses on dental dissolution and have seen mixed results, with some enhancing demineralization while others promote remineralization [1421]. The problem with these erosion studies is that they each quantify erosion with varied measurement techniques [1421] and only examined a solitary outcome for erosion. As a result, the current available research fails to truly elucidate the effect of oral rinse composition on dissolution and ignores the effect of these treatments on the remaining tooth mineral composition and structure. In addition, basic science studies examining the effects of specific ions/molecules on mineral content fail to provide clear clinically-relevant relationships about current treatment options [22, 23].

In this study, we seek to elucidate the effect of clinically-relevant oral rinse composition on the dissolution, composition and structure of biomimetic dental apatites. We applied a multi-technique approach to understand the effects of four different clinically-relevant solutions containing: aqueous bases, high phosphate levels, mucin-like molecules, and fluoride. The combination of mass loss, pH, Raman spectroscopy, Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES), and X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements allowed us to provide a comprehensive view of how these solutions modify dental tissues at a compositional and structural level. This research will increase scientific understanding of the consequences of oral rinses beyond dissolution by elucidating their effects on remaining tooth solubility and strength. Due to the increased caries risk seen in xerostomia patients, this research will also help with clinical decision making when selecting xerostomia treatment options.

Methods

Synthesis of carbonated hydroxyapatite

Biomimetic dental apatites were prepared via aqueous precipitation methods as previously summarized here [24, 25]. Calcium nitrate and sodium phosphate were simultaneously added to 250 mL of MilliQ water heated to 60°C dropwise at a rate of 1 mL/min. Varying levels of sodium bicarbonate were added to the initial aqueous solution to create crystals containing ~6, 8, and 10% wt% carbonate, equivalent to levels seen in dentin. All chemicals were sourced from ACROS OrganicsTM, Fair Lawn, NJ. The pH was maintained between 8.9–9.1 using sodium hydroxide (NaOH). Following titration, the solution was kept at constant temperature (60°C) and pH (9) for two hours with constant stirring. The resulting crystals containing ~6, 8, or 10% wt% carbonate were filtered in a Gooch Vacuum Filter, rinsed with deionized water, and dried at 60°C overnight.

Preparation of solutions

To determine the effects of oral rinse composition on biomimetic dental mineral, four solutions were selected: (1) Tap water (aqueous base) (2) 1X phosphate buffered saline (PBS—aqueous base with additional phosphate), (3) Biotène Dry Mouth Oral Rinse® (mucin like containing—MLC), and (4) ACT® Anticavity Total Fluoride Mouthwash (fluoride containing—FC). The tap water was sourced from the Farmington, CT water supply. PBS was diluted from 10X PBS (Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) in MilliQ water. Biotène and ACT oral rinses were purchased from a local pharmacy. Biotène and ACT represent some of the most commonly prescribed oral rinses for xerostomia. Although they have complex compositions, these 2 solutions were selected for the presence of mucin-like molecules such as hydroxyethyl cellulose in Biotène and the presence of high levels of fluoride in ACT (S1 Table), making them unique and clinically-relevant solutions.

The original solutions were measured for initial pH, which are referred to as unmodified solutions. About 100 mL of each solution was adjusted to pHs of 5.5, 7.4, or 8.0 via the addition of either NaOH or hydrochloric acid (HCl) to represent changes to the oral environment. Since the unmodified pH of tap water was 8.0, the data for the unmodified and pH 8 conditions for tap water have been combined, resulting in a sample size of 6.

Exposure of biomimetic apatites to solutions

50 milligrams of either 5.7, 8.4, or 10.0 ± 0.6 wt% CO32- apatite powder (respectively denoted as low, medium, and high CO32-) was placed into a 15 mL centrifuge tube with 10 mL of either tap water, PBS, MLC, or FC solutions at varying pHs. These conditions examined 3 main variables: solution type, solution pH, and mineral carbonate content, creating a parameter space composed of 45 separate conditions.

Powders were agitated in the solutions for 72 hours during which the solution pH was measured at 1, 3, 6, 8, 24, 48, and 72 hr. After 72 hours, crystals and remaining solute were separated and collected after filtering through a medium fine filter paper (FisherBrandTM, Waltham, MA). The following outcomes were characterized for each powder per condition, before and after solution exposure: mass loss, the carbonate levels, the lattice spacing, crystal size, and microstrain. The change in pH of the solutions, as well as dissolved solutes were also measured.

Determination of apatite powder carbonate content with Raman spectroscopy

The composition of the powders was analyzed using a WITec alpha300vR Raman microscope with a 785 nm laser. 10 spectra per powder were obtained with a 50x objective and an integration time of 32 acquisitions x 0.5 seconds. Using the Witec Project 5.1 software, background corrections and advanced fitting features were used to fit the 431, 590, 950, 960, 1045, and 1070 Δcm-1 peak areas using a Gaussian function. The carbonate to phosphate (CO32-/PO43-) ratio was calculated from the 1070 Δcm-1 ν1 apatitic carbonate vibration peak area divided by the sum of the 950 and 960 Δcm-1 ν1 apatitic phosphate vibration peaks areas (1070/950+960). CO32-/PO43- ratios were averaged across all spectra for each condition and compared to unexposed powders to determine percent change. CO32-/PO43- ratios were compared to instrument specific standard curves to obtain values of wt% carbonate for the powders.

Measuring lattice parameters and crystal size with XRD

X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis was performed on one powder sample from each of the 45 conditions on a Bruker D2 Phaser X-Ray Diffractometer (Bruker AXS, Germany) with Cu Kɑ radiation (λ = 1.5406) operating at 30kV and 10mA. The samples were scanned at an acquisition rate of 1.0 s/step with a step size of 0.02° from 20°- 60° (2Θ). XRD patterns were compared with standards from the ICDD powder diffraction file PDF-2 and PDF-4 database to identify any changes in phase or the presence of secondary phases. (002), (004), and (310) peaks of apatite were fit using a PseudoVoigt function to measure peaks centers and integral breadth. a- and c-axis lattice parameters were calculated from the peak centers using Bragg’s law. c-axis crystal size and microstrain were calculated from the integral breadth using the Halder-Wagner method [26].

Determination of solute composition via ICP-OES

Solution solutes were analyzed via Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES) to determine the amount of calcium, phosphorus, sodium, and potassium dissolved into the solution during exposure. One sample from each condition was tested in a Perkin Elmer Optima 7300 Dual View ICP-OES at the Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering laboratory at UConn. Samples were diluted in a stepwise fashion using 1% nitric acid: 0.5% hydrochloric solution until concentrations of the elements of interest were within the calibration range. Interference check solutions were analyzed (ICS A and ICS A+B; High Purity Standards, Charleston, SC) with all sample runs to compensate for matrix effects which may interfere with sample analysis. Standard quality assurance procedures were employed, including analysis of duplicate samples, method blanks, post digestion spiked samples, and laboratory control samples. Instrument response was evaluated initially, every 10 samples, and at the end of an analytical run using a calibration verification standard and blank.

Statistical analysis

Statistical significance was determined for all quantitative outcomes including: mass loss, pH change, change in CO32-/PO43- ratio, d-spacing, crystal size, microstrain, and calcium, phosphorus, sodium, and potassium solution content. Multi-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVAs) was used considering the factors of pH (5.5, 7.4, 8.0 or unmodified), carbonate level (low, medium, high) and solution type (PBS, MLC rinse, FC rinse, or tap water). Multiple sets of one-way ANOVAs were then run for each factor with Tukey Pairwise comparisons to identify significance for each independent variable. Significance was established as p < 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed with MiniTab (MiniTab, LLC, State College, PA).

Pearson’s correlation coefficients were used to determine the relationship between the measured parameters and controlled factors. Statistical significance of samples was denoted as p < 0.05.

Results

These experiments examined 3 main variables: solution type, solution pH, and mineral carbonate content, creating a parameter space composed of 45 separate conditions. The following outcomes were characterized for each powder per condition, pre and post dissolution: mass loss, the carbonate levels, the lattice spacing, crystal size, and microstrain. The change in pH of the solutions with time, as well as the elements dissolved into the solute were also measured to determine the effect of solution composition on biomimetic dental mineral dissolution/recrystallization.

Effects of water-based solution

Preexposure tap water contained ~0.015 g/L of sodium (Na), ~0.0019 g/L of potassium (K), ~0.0035 g/L of calcium (Ca), and non-detectable phosphorus (P) levels. This makes water the least mineralized solution and the only one without P. Solution Ca (up to 0.08 g/L) and P (up to 0.04 g/L) increased with exposure irrespective of initial pH (pHi) and initial CO32- content (Figs 1A and 2A).

Fig 1. Change in calcium levels in the solutions after exposure.

Fig 1

Calcium increased in all solutions, confirming apatite dissolution (A-D). Generally, calcium levels in the solution increased as pHi decreased for PBS (B). For water, MLC, and FC, there are no apparent trends (A, C, D). Overall, water had the most calcium in the solution after exposure since there is less calcium in water compared to the other solutions (A).

Fig 2. Change in phosphorus amounts in the solution after exposure.

Fig 2

P decreased in all solutions except water, indicating an uptake of phosphorus in the apatite during recrystallization (A-D). There are no apparent trends in PBS and MLC (B, C). In FC, P decreased in the solution as initial pHi decreased (D). P increased in water due to the non-detectable levels of the initial solution (A).

Solutions pH increased after powder exposure in all conditions, causing an average pH change (ΔpH) of 2.8, 1.3, and 1.2 pH units for pHi of 5.5, 7.4, and 8.0 respectively. A decrease in pHi lead to an increase in ΔpH at all CO32- wt% (p = 0.000) while lower initial CO32- amounts led to a decrease in ΔpH (p = 0.000) at all pHi’s (Fig 3A). The average mass loss in water was 0.011 g, with no statistically difference as a function of pHi or initial CO32- level (Fig 4A)

Fig 3. The change in pH (ΔpH) of the solutions as a function of initial pH.

Fig 3

ΔpH increased as initial pH decreased for Water, PBS, and MLC, indicating that the powder is buffering the solution more at lower pHs (A, B, C). For FC, ΔpH increased as initial pH increased (D).

Fig 4. Mass loss as a function of pH at each wt% carbonate for each solution.

Fig 4

Mass decreased for all solutions, indicating powder erosion (A-D). Powders in FC had the greatest mass loss (D) while PBS and Water had the least (A, B).

Water increased the CO32-/PO43- of the apatite powders in all conditions (Fig 5A). No statistically significant relationship was identified between the change in CO32-/PO43- and initial CO32- wt%, nor between CO32-/PO43- and pHi in water. A higher final CO32-/PO43- content weakly correlated to a decrease in Ca, P, and K (cCa = -0.495; cP = -0.459; cK = -0.497) in the solution after exposure (Table 1).

Fig 5. Δ Carbonate: Phosphate ratios of CAP powders after exposure as a function of initial pH.

Fig 5

CO32-:PO42- ratios decreased for PBS, MLC, and FC after solution exposure (B-D) while Water increased, suggesting an increase in carbonate amount (A). For PBS, CO32-:PO42- significantly decreases as pHi decreases at all wt% CO32- (B). MLC and FC trended similarly to PBS (C, D), suggesting a loss of carbonate in apatite. Raman spectra of 6 wt% carbonated apatite after exposure in water (blue), PBS (red), MLC (green), and FC (purple) solutions at pH 5.5 (E).

Table 1. Correlation between all solution and powder conditions and outcomes.

pHi Δcrystal size Δstrain 002 004 310 ΔCa ΔP ΔNa ΔK
CO3/PO4f PBS 0.463 -0.427 0.446 0.828 0.792 -0.579 -0.694 -0.520 0.230 -0.635
MLC 0.415 -0.289 0.117 0.038 0.750 -0.772 0.204 0.203 0.213 -0.604
FC 0.664 -0.347 0.207 0.484 0.743 0.246 -0.074 0.490 0.069 0.281
Water 0.118 -0.042 0.214 0.500 0.388 -0.516 -0.495 -0.459 0.555 -0.497
% ΔCO3/PO4 PBS -0.677 -0.143 0.074 0.399 0.193 0.287 0.333 -0.273 0.208 0.122
MLC -0.603 0.240 -0.405 0.214 0.305 -0.024 -0.182 -0.353 0.073 -0.056
FC -0.707 0.361 -0.468 -0.173 -0.500 0.063 -0.085 -0.556 0.305 -0.044
Water -0.251 0.010 0.051 -0.413 -0.213 0.259 0.321 0.301 0.024 0.500
pHi PBS -0.208 0.182 0.239 0.374 -0.663 -0.825 0.065 0.132 -0.340
MLC -0.612 0.574 -0.020 0.199 -0.649 0.244 0.436 0.089 -0.314
FC -0.217 0.188 0.450 0.674 0.145 -0.531 0.915 -0.067 0.631
Water -0.189 0.163 0.324 0.300 0.206 -0.071 0.015 -0.290 -0.166
ΔpH PBS 0.058 -0.079 0.203 0.037 0.460 0.597 -0.326 -0.033 0.106
MLC 0.615 -0.655 -0.106 0.002 0.270 -0.053 -0.245 0.131 0.089
FC -0.531 0.104 0.156 0.458 0.517 0.082 0.279 0.364 0.279
Water 0.109 0.024 -0.117 -0.107 -0.413 -0.172 -0.235 0.573 -0.010
Δcrystal size PBS -0.967 -0.276 -0.309 0.425
MLC -0.942 -0.420 -0.404 0.317
FC -0.795 -0.101 -0.549 -0.483
Water -0.932 -0.220 -0.418 -0.628
Δstrain PBS 0.192 0.307 -0.507
MLC 0.337 0.303 -0.169
FC 0.236 0.619 0.182
Water 0.044 0.342 0.491

Bolded is p < 0.05. Bolded and italicized is p = 0.05.

Comparison of XRD spectra with standard spectra confirmed that the sample was hydroxyapatite or carbonated apatite with no secondary phases both before and after exposure. The average crystal size and average microstrain (εRMS) were variable irrespective of pH and initial CO32-content, suggesting that the structure is unaffected by water exposure (S1A Fig and Fig 6A). The (002) c-axis d-spacing (dC) and the (310) a-axis d-spacing (dA) showed no clear trends (Fig 7A). The dC decreased with increasing ΔCO32-/PO43- (c002 = -0.413 and c004 = -0.213) and decreasing final CO32-/PO43- (c002 = 0.500; c004 = 0.388).

Fig 6. The internal microstrain of CAP after solution exposure.

Fig 6

Small variations in microstrain were shown in water, suggesting no major change in structure (A). The microstrain decreased for PBS, MLC, and FC, although there are no trends relative to pH and wt% CO32- (B-D). This shows that the apatite is becoming a more perfect crystal after solution exposure. Error bars account for the standard deviations related to the y-intercept derived from the Halder-Wagner equation.

Fig 7. D-spacing of the c-axis (002) and a-axis (004) of CAP after exposure.

Fig 7

Generally, the c-axis decreased, and the a-axis increased for PBS and MLC (B, C). For FC, both c-axis and a-axis decreased (C). These changes in d-spacing specify structural changes in apatite after solution exposure. Water exhibited variations of these axes, which is indicative of no structural differences of CAP (A). Error bars account for XRD peak fitting errors.

Effects of phosphorus-content in solution

Before dissolution at all pH’s, PBS contained ~3.4 g/L of Na, ~0.4 g/L of P, ~1.8・10−7 g/L of K and ~ 4・10−4 g/L of Ca. After exposure, Ca (up to 0.03 g/L) and K (up to 0.06 g/L) increased and P (down to -0.13 g/L) decreased (Figs 1B, 2B and S3B). The decrease in phosphorus is weakly correlated to pHi and ΔpH (correlation factors of 0.07 and -0.32, respectively, Table 1).

On average, pH increased by ~1, 0.4, and 0.5 pH units with decreasing initial pH. ΔpH was not affected by initial CO32-, (Fig 3B) but decreased with increasing pHi (p = 0.000) (Fig 3B). ΔpH also increased with increasing Ca content (c = 0.597) (Table 1). PBS generated an average apatite mass loss of 0.011 g (Fig 4B), similar to water. These values showed no clear trends as a function of carbonate wt% or pHi of the solution.

Unlike the water-based solution with no phosphorus, powder carbonate levels decreased in PBS (Fig 5B). Higher initial CO32- levels in decreased CO32- content after exposure. At all pHi, CO32- loss was reduced at low initial CO32- levels (p = 0.02) (Fig 5B). There was a negative correlation between pHi and CO32- loss (c = -0.677; p = 0.045) (Table 1). Final powder CO32- levels correlated negatively to the decrease in phosphorus in the solution (c = -0.520) (Table 1).

XRD results indicated that dC generally decreased while dA increased with exposure. The change in c-axis d-spacing (ΔdC) decreased as the CO32- content increased (Fig 7B). The change in a-axis d-spacing (ΔdA) did not change with initial CO32- content nor pHi. PBS increased the average crystal size of the powders by 0.3–1.4 nm (S1B Fig). Overall, there were no clear trends in size change as a function of pHi or CO32- content. Conversely, the microstrain (εRMS) on the crystals decreased after phosphorus exposure suggesting the presence of more uniform and organized crystals (Fig 6B). The εRMS showed no clear trends with either pHi or CO32- content. Correlation studies found that an increase in final CO32-/PO43- in the powders exposed to phosphorus correlates positively to a significant increase in dC (c002 = 0.83; c004 = 0.79) (p ≤ 0.01) and negatively with dA (c310 = -0.58) (Table 1).

Effects of mucin-like molecules in solution

Pre-exposure MLC solution contained ~1.3 g/L Na, ~0.36 g/L P, ~0.015 g/L K, and ~0.0006–0.0014 g/L Ca for all pH’s. Post exposure, Ca and Na increased (up to 0.6 g/L and 0.1 g/L, respectively), while phosphorus decreased (down to ~0.1 g/L) at all pH’s (Figs 1C, 2C and S2C Fig). However, unlike PBS, there is no strong correlation between calcium, phosphorus, sodium levels, CO32- content, or any of the pH factors.

In all cases, the pH of the solutions increased with powder exposure. On average, pH 5.5, unmodified, pH 7.4 and 8.0 increased by 1, 0.4, 0.4, and 0.2 pH units, respectively (Fig 3C). The pHi is negatively correlated to ΔpH.

The MLC caused an average mass loss of 0.013 g (Fig 4C), slightly larger than what was seen in water and PBS. This mass loss is generally unaffected by initial CO32- content or pHi (Fig 4C). The CO32-/PO43- ratio generally decreased for the samples exposed to MLC solution as seen in PBS (Fig 5C). There are no clear trends relating initial CO32- levels in the powders to the amount of CO32- lost with exposure (Fig 5C). Contrarily, a decrease in pHi generally resulted in an increase in CO32- loss (Fig 5C).

In general, ΔdC decreased and ΔdA increased with exposure irrespectively of pHi and initial CO32- content. The MLC solution increased the crystal size by 0.03–1.56 nm and decreased εRMS by 0.00182–0.014, except for pH 8 (S1C Fig and Fig 6C). Increases in final CO32- content and pHi were significantly correlated to a decrease in dA (cCO3 = -0.772; p = 0.003 and cpH = -0.649; p = 0.02) (Table 1). There was a weak correlation between dC and final CO32- content and pHi, (c = 0.750; p = 0.0049) (Table 1). The crystal size has a negative correlation with pHi (c = -0.612; p = 0.034) and a positive correlation with ΔpH (c = 0.615; p = 0.03) (Table 1). Conversely, εRMS has a positive correlation with pHi (c = 0.574; p = 0.05) and a negative correlation with ΔpH (c = -0.655; p = 0.02) (Table 1).

Effects of fluoride in solution

Before exposure, the FC solution had ~1.3 g/L of Na, ~0.84 g/L of K, ~0.62 g/L of P, and ~0.0033 g/L of Ca. This is the highest P of all solutions. P decreased to ~.23 g/L in the solution after powder exposure for all CO32- contents and pHi (Fig 2D). There is a strong correlation between the decrease in phosphorus in the solution as pHi decreased (c = 0.915; p = 0.000) while a decrease in phosphorus negatively correlated to ΔCO32- /PO43- (c = -0.556) (Table 1). Although there were no clear trends with pHi and CO32- content, there was a general increase in calcium in the solution after powder exposure (Fig 1D). Solution calcium content was negatively correlated with pHi (c = -0.531) (Table 1).

The pH of the FC solutions increased with powder exposure to significantly higher levels than in MLC and PBS (Fig 3D). On average, the FC solution increased by 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, and 0.8 pH units for pH 5.5, pH 7.4, 8.0, and unmodified, respectively. The ΔpH increased significantly with increased initial CO32- level and decreased pHi (Fig 3D).

The FC solution had an average mass loss of 0.016 g (Fig 4D); the largest mass loss of the 4 solutions studied. This mass loss did not vary with pHi or initial CO32- content, similar to MLC and PBS (Fig 4D).

In general, CO32-/PO43- decreased at all pHi (Fig 5D) in FC, exhibiting the highest CO32- loss of all the solutions. No statistically significant relationship was identified between the change in CO32-/PO43- and initial CO32- wt%. However, there was a significant negative correlation between pHi and percent change in CO32-/PO43- post dissolution (c = -0.707; p = 0.01) (Table 1).

The dC and dA decreased with FC exposure for all conditions (Fig 7D). The dC decreased with decreasing CO32-/PO43- (c002 = 0.484; p = 0.0056) and pHi (c002 = 0.450; p = 0.016) (Table 1). The dA was weakly positively correlated to the final CO32-/PO43- (c = 0.246) and pHi (c = 0.145) (Table 1). In general, the crystal size increased up to 3.7 nm and εRMS decreased down to -0.19 irrespective of CO32- content and pHi (S1D Fig and Fig 6D). Unlike other solutions, an increase in εRMS is significantly correlated to the increase in dC in FC rinse (c004 = 0.619; p = 0.032) (Table 1).

Discussion

Ideally, xerostomia oral rinses would provide relief from the discomfort associated with dry mouth while maintaining tooth health. To address how the composition of xerostomia rinses impacts tooth health, numerous studies have examined the effect of different rinses and artificial salivas on tooth erosion [1421, 27], which is defined as dissolution of mineralized tissue on the surface of teeth. Erosion tests usually involve placing dental tissues into the rinses of interest, followed by measurements of erosion via gravimetric analysis [20, 21], superficial hardness [18], microradiography [14, 16], fluorescence [17], or the amount of phosphorus dissolved [15]. These single outcome studies and variable measurement techniques have led to a contradictory body of literature where some have shown mineral loss while others show mineral gain [1421]. Although these techniques are useful, these individual outcomes are not sufficient to understand the effects of xerostomia treatments on tooth health. In addition, the use of human or bovine teeth in most of these studies makes it difficult to identify precise dissolution mechanisms due to the pre-testing history of the tissues. To avoid these pitfalls, we have conducted a multi-technique analysis of the effect of the composition of clinically-relevant xerostomia rinses on well characterized biomimetic apatites. The goal is to determine how these treatments and the water, phosphorus content, presence of large mucin-like molecules, and fluoride in the rinses affect the dissolution, structure, and composition of the mineral.

Water causes the formation of a carbonated surface layer

For many individuals who suffer from xerostomia, a first treatment option is rinsing or drinking water. However, rinsing with water provides only temporary relief for dry mouth, requiring constant swishing or drinking. To investigate the effect of water on dental mineral, we exposed biomimetic apatites to tap water. Water exposure led to an average 22% decrease in total sample mass. This large loss is likely due to dissolution of the crystals in the solution. Dental erosion does not occur at this rate in healthy individuals, suggesting that there are factors in the oral environment that were not accounted for here. These include increased surface area of the powders compared to natural tooth and a lack of protective pellicle formation in vitro [28, 10].

We found that pH had little effect on the extent of mass loss. The pH values selected here range from normal (pH 6–7), to more extreme salivary pHs (pH 5–8) during low and peak flow periods, respectively [10]. The lack of pH effects was unexpected, as it is generally accepted that solutions with lower pHs are more likely to dissolve mineral [20, 21]. However, other studies have similarly seen no effect of pH on mineral dissolution [15]. The mass loss was also independent of the initial carbonate content of the biomimetic apatite powders, despite its known effect on apatite solubility [29, 25].

This lack of pH effect may be related to the rapid ability of the powders to buffer the water solution. In all cases, the solution pH increased rapidly within the first hour of exposure to the apatites. Unlike mass loss, ΔpH was dependent on both initial pHi and initial CO32- content of the powders, where ΔpH increased as pHi decreased and CO32- content increased. These results suggest that the powders were able to (1) either release buffering moieties like bicarbonate, HCO3-, or (2) uptake protons to increase the solution pH as previously described both in vitro and in vivo [3033]. The dissolution of the crystals may have released HCO3-, but it also released calcium and phosphorus into solution. The ratio of released calcium and phosphorus (Ca/P ratio) in solution has a value of ~1.8, indicating near stoichiometric dissolution as predicted by a Ca/P value of 1.67 for pure hydroxyapatite [34].

Despite this evidence of dissolution and buffering, Raman measurements of CO32-/PO43- ratios in post-exposure crystals indicate that CO32- content increased in apatite with exposure. Therefore, the pH change must be explained either by buffering via PO43-, as indicated by the increased P in the water after exposure, or by uptake of H+ by the crystals [22]. The d-spacing, size, and εRMS of the crystals after exposure showed no clear changes as indicated by XRD, suggesting that the additional CO32- seen in Raman is not being substituted into the crystal lattice. Thus, we hypothesize that the additional CO32- is maintained on the surface of the crystals as labile carbonate [3436]. We suggest that H+ ions from the solution may have been attracted to the negatively charged apatite, increasing the solution pH. The associated shift to a positive surface may have then recruited CO32- ions, possibly from dissolved atmospheric carbon dioxide, to the apatite surface creating a hydrated ion-rich surface layer with labile carbonate.

Although the tap water is fluoridated, the XRD results did not show the formation of fluorapatite. However, this may be expected as the water contained between 0.8 mg/L—1.2 mg/L of fluoride [37]. It is likely that the low fluoridation levels found in drinking water would not cause phase changes in the short time frame measured here. In conclusion, it appears that dental mineral when exposed to tap water acts to sequester H+ ions, thus buffering the solution and forming a highly carbonated surface layer (Fig 8). The presence of this layer may serve to protect the mineral from future acid assaults via rapid release of CO32-.

Fig 8. Summary of dissolution mechanism of CAP in each solution.

Fig 8

Water does not affect apatite erosion and leaves labile carbonate on the crystal surface. The addition of phosphorus in solution allows carbonate to be released from apatite to buffer the acid in the solution. MLC has a similar mechanism, however, mucin-like molecules binding to apatite may affect apatite erosion. While carbonate is dissolved from apatite into FC to buffer the acid, fluoride may be incorporated into apatite during recrystallization.

PBS exposure causes the reprecipitation of less-carbonated apatites

PBS is not prescribed as an oral rinse in dental settings; however, it is the main storage solution in dental research. This phosphate buffered saline is believed to mitigate the dissolution of mineralized tissues due to its high phosphate content. However, post-exposure mass loss was greater in PBS than the water solution. The lower levels of calcium in PBS than in water may have contributed to the increased mass loss since a lack of calcium in saline solutions has been shown to cause calcium release from bone over time [38]. This is supported by the increase in calcium in the solution after powder exposure.

Similar to the water, all of the conditions exhibited an increase in pH with powder exposure. However, unlike water, the PBS-exposed apatite powders showed a decrease in CO32- content. This suggests that instead of sequestering H+, the addition of P to the solution caused a release of CO32-, most likely in the form of HCO3-, from the apatite into the solution to buffer the acid in PBS. This behavior has been previously reported in the literature for both teeth and bones [30, 31].

It is debated about whether the released CO32- is taken from the surface of the crystals as labile carbonate or from within the crystal lattice. XRD results showed that exposure to PBS increased the a-axis and decreased the c-axis lattice spacing of the apatite crystals. This points to a loss of B-type CO32-, where carbonate is substituted for PO43-, from the crystal lattice resulting in lattice deformation. Taken together, the data suggests that the apatite powders undergo dissolution, during which the CO32- is used for buffering, followed by reprecipitation of a less-carbonated apatite. Since B-type CO32- substitution requires carbonate to substitute for phosphate, reprecipitation of apatites with less carbonate would require additional phosphorus. This uptake of P by the recrystallized apatite is confirmed by a decrease in P ions in the PBS solution after exposure. XRD results also showed an increase in average crystal size and a decrease in εRMS with exposure to PBS as expected for an apatite with decreased carbonate [39]. Overall, these results suggest that biomimetic apatites undergo dissolution followed by reprecipitation of less-carbonated crystals in PBS at all of the measured pHs (Fig 8). This change in the composition of the remaining apatite will significantly affect the solubility and mechanics of the tooth [39] resulting in stiffer and more corrosion resistant tissue.

Large hydrophilic molecules in MLC may affect reprecipitation

MLC rinse (Biotène) is a commonly recommended oral rinse for xerostomia, with a recommended exposure of up to five 30-second rinses per day [40]. The MLC rinse is similar to PBS, with both containing an aqueous base with high phosphorus levels. However, MLC also contains large hydrophilic mucin-like molecules, like the hydroxyethyl cellulose (HEC), that are often added to provide a sense of hydration and lubrication [12]. Addition of mucins or mucin-like moieties has been shown to be protective against demineralization [4144]. However, the apatite powders exposed to MLC rinse had a significant mass loss with exposure. While mucin-like molecules may have the ability to adsorb to apatite surfaces to possibly create a barrier [42], our Raman results suggest that HEC was only weakly adsorbed to the apatite surface since it was easily removed by three water rinses.

In terms of composition and structure, the powders exposed to MLC rinse showed general trends of decreasing CO32- content, dC, εRMS, and solution phosphorus with exposure as seen in the PBS. However, the changes are smaller and the trends are less clear, indicating a modified dissolution and reprecipitation process. While mucins may limit demineralization, they may also limit remineralization, possibly due to complexation with calcium and increased viscosity preventing ion exchange [4547]. This suggests that although the mucin-like moieties are not significantly affecting dissolution in this study, they may be affecting the reprecipitation process that may explain the highly variable mineral composition and structure in MLC exposed apatites. Taken together, these results show how mucin-like moieties may affect the delicate balance of demineralization and remineralization in the oral environment (Fig 8), and they should be considered as a potential mechanism of action affecting dental tissue composition.

Fluoride in FC solution promoted reprecipitation of fluorapatite

The FC rinse (ACT) is another commonly recommended oral rinses for xerostomia with a suggested use of two 1-minute rinses everyday [48]. The composition of the FC rinse is relatively similar to the MLC rinse, with the addition of high levels of fluoride ([F-] 90 mg/L); approximately 75–112.5 times more concentrated than tap water. Historically, fluoride has been added to public sources of drinking water, toothpaste and other dental applications to promote the formation of fluorapatite, a fluoride-substituted apatite, in dental tissues [49]. The addition of fluoride to salivary rinses have shown to protect against demineralization and promote remineralization [17, 27, 50].

In this study, the apatite exposed to FC rinse behaved similarly to the apatites in PBS and MLC rinses in terms of mass loss, ΔpH, and mineral carbonate content. FC exhibited the largest mass loss of all solutions as well as the greatest increase in the final solution pH. The large decrease in CO32- content in the FC exposed powders suggests that these powders are undergoing classical dissolution-reprecipitation processes.

However, in this case the reprecipitated crystal is not a low-carbonate apatite, but fluorapatite, as suggested by the peak shift of the v1 PO4 in the Raman spectra (Fig 5E). In addition, comparison of XRD spectra with standards from the PDF 2001 library showed that the post-exposure powders exhibit a greater resemblance to fluorapatite than carbonated apatite. The decrease in both dC and dA supports this removal of CO32- and formation of fluorapatite since fluorapatite exhibits a smaller dA than carbonated apatites [51]. This phase change decreased εRMS and increased crystal size, as expected for the more crystalline fluorapatite. This reprecipitation also resulted in a decrease in solution phosphorus levels as it was likely taken up to form fluorapatite crystals (Fig 8). Since fluorapatite has a lower density than hydroxyapatite, this may explain the larger mass loss with FC rinse exposure. Overall, this highlights the need to look beyond dissolution alone to understand how dental mineral will be affected by solution exposure.

The phase change of carbonated apatite to fluorapatite has significant dental benefits as fluorapatite exhibits decreased solubility and increased erosion resistance, therefore, protecting against acidogenic bacteria and reducing the risk of caries [49]. However, the addition of fluoride to the lattice structure also embrittles the mineral which can increase the risk of tissue fracture [52]. Thus, the balance between mechanics and erosion risk must be considered.

Experimental limitations

Like any experimental in vitro study, there are limitations to the presented work. Regarding mass loss, the powders from all four solutions were scraped off the paper filters and weighed as such. Due to the small initial mass, it is possible that this led to non-significant data. Another limitation is that A-type CO32- substitutions are not accounted for in this study. Although small quantities of A-type CO32- are present in bones and teeth, B-type CO32- substitutions are predominantly found in these tissues [25, 53, 54], similar to our synthesized apatites. The changes in the lattice spacing from XRD indeed indicates that the bulk of the substitutions are B-type CO32- in our system and not A-type CO32-. However, Raman is unable to distinguish between the two substitution types making it difficult to determine the role of A-type CO32- in this study. Finally, in attempting to isolate the effects of these varied xerostomia rinses, we must recognize that the composition of these solutions are complex, with more than one variable at play. While there are other ingredients in the FC and MLC rinses that could be affecting the dissolution seen in these experiments, the interactions between mucin-like molecules and fluoride on teeth have been previously shown to have the greatest effect on apatite mineral; therefore, we have chosen to focus on these factors instead of the many additional ingredients. We believe that this study plays a crucial role in beginning to elucidate properties of these components.

Conclusion

The objective of this study was to elucidate the effects of clinically-relevant xerostomia rinse compositions on dentin-like biomimetic apatites. Four solutions were investigated to determine the effects of water, phosphorus content, mucin-like molecules, and fluoride on dental mineral. Biomimetic carbonated apatites with low, medium, and high levels of carbonate were exposed to each solution at pH 5.5, 7.4, 8.0, and unmodified for 72 hrs. In all cases, exposure to the solutions lead to mineral mass loss. There was no benefit to the addition of phosphorus, fluoride, or mucin-like molecules in terms of dissolution alone. However, the compositional and structural changes to the apatite were solution dependent (Fig 8). In the case of water, the structure of the crystals was minimally affected and instead, the apatites appeared to form a carbonate-rich surface layer. This was completely different from the three phosphorus containing solutions, in which there were significant decreases in carbonate content as well as changes to the lattice structure and crystal size. We propose that the addition of phosphorus shifts the mechanism to dissolution and reprecipitation. The addition of mucin-like molecules in the MLC rinse appeared to have a variable effect on the reprecipitation of the crystals, leading to unclear trends as compared to PBS. The addition of fluoride in the FC solution caused a phase change to fluorapatite during the reprecipitation. Taken together, this study shows that solution composition has a significant effect on the mode of dissolution and possible reprecipitation of dentin-like crystals. These changes to the crystals will have significant consequences on the minerals solubility and mechanics, affecting its response to future changes in pH and mechanical loading. This study highlights the need to look beyond dissolution when examining the effects of dental treatments and will help clinicians to consider the complex consequences of the use of xerostomia oral rinses when advising patients.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Change in crystallite size after solution exposure.

CAP has variations in crystal size after exposure to water, suggesting that the internal structure does not change (A). The crystallite size of CAP increased in PBS, MLC, and FC, indicating that CAP is becoming more crystalline after exposure (B-D). Error bars account for standard deviations related to the slope derived from the Halder-Wagner equation.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Change in sodium after exposure.

An increase in sodium in water may be due to a low sodium content in the pre-exposure water and indicates that CAP is releasing sodium during exposure (A). The amount of sodium in solution varied in PBS, MLC, and FC irrespective of pHi and powder carbonate content (B-D).

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Change in potassium in the solution after exposure.

Potassium generally increased in PBS, revealing that apatite is releasing potassium (B). The opposite is shown for FC, where the decrease in potassium suggests that CAP is up taking into the structure during recrystallization to account for charge balance of the crystals (D). MLC and water were variable, implying that potassium has little effect in these solutions (A, C).

(TIF)

S1 Table. List of ingredients for Biotene and ACT.

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge Anthony D’Angio for his analysis of the Raman standards. The Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering at UConn provided the ICP-OES data. XRD data was acquired at the UConn Institute of Materials Science.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by Professor Alix Deymier’s Startup Funds. M.M.M was funded through the University of Connecticut School of Dental Medicine Summer Research Fellowship Funds. S.L.W was funded through the University of Connecticut Graduate School Biomedical Sciences Program. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Bartels C. Xerostomia. Available from: https://oralcancerfoundation.org/complications/xerostomia/, 2019.
  • 2.Sreebny LM, Vissink A. Dry Mouth: The Malevolent Symptom: A Clinical Guide. Ames, Iowa, Ames, Iowa. Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Delli K, Spijkervet FKL, Kroese FGM, Bootsma H, Vissink A. Xerostomia. Saliva: Secretion and Functions 2014;24:109–125 10.1159/000358792 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Department of Scientific Information, ADA Science Institute. Xerostomia (Dry Mouth). Available from: https://www.ada.org/en/member-center/oral-health-topics/xerostomia, 2020.
  • 5.Ship JA, Pillemer SR, Baum BJ. Xerostomia and the Geriatric Patient. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2002;50:535–543 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50123.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Gupta A, Epstein JB, Sroussi H. Hyposalivation in elderly patients. J Can Dent Assoc 2006;72:841. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Turner MD. Hyposalivation and Xerostomia. Dent Clin North Am 2016;60:435–443 10.1016/j.cden.2015.11.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Dreizen S, Brown LR, Handler S, Levy BM. Radiation-induced xerostomia in cancer patients. Effect on salivary and serum electrolytes. Cancer 1976;38:273–278 10.1002/1097-0142(197607)38:1&lt;273::aid-cncr2820380141&gt;3.0.co;2-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Pontes CdB Polizello ACM, Spadaro ACC. Clinical and biochemical evaluation of the saliva of patients with xerostomia induced by radiotherapy. Brazilian Oral Research 2004;18:69–74 10.1590/S1806-83242004000100013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Humphrey SP, Williamson RT. A review of saliva: Normal composition, flow, and function. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2001;85:162–169 10.1067/mpr.2001.113778 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Dirix P, Nuyts S, Van den Bogaert W. Radiation-induced xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer. Cancer 2006;107:2525–2534 10.1002/cncr.22302 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Vissink A, ’s-Gravenmade EJ, Panders AK, Vermey A, Petersen JK, Visch LL, et al. A clinical comparison between commercially available mucin- and CMC-containing saliva substitutes. International Journal of Oral Surgery 1983;12:232–238 10.1016/s0300-9785(83)80048-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Jose A, Siddiqi M, Cronin M, DiLauro TS, Bosma ML. A randomized clinical trial in subjects with dry mouth evaluating subjective perceptions of an experimental oral gel, an oral rinse and a mouth spray compared to water. Am J Dent 2016;29:58–64. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kielbassa AM, Shohadai SP, Schulte-Mönting J. Effect of saliva substitutes on mineral content of demineralized and sound dental enamel. Support Care Cancer 2001;9:40–47 10.1007/s005200000148 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Smith G, Smith AJ, Shaw L, Shaw MJ. Artificial saliva substitutes and mineral dissolution. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2001;28:728–731 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00803.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Meyer‐Lueckel H, Schulte‐Mönting J, Kielbassa A. The effect of commercially available saliva substitutes on predemineralized bovine dentin in vitro. Oral Dis 2002;8:192–198 10.1034/j.1601-0825.2002.01762.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Gorovenko MR. Effect of Biotene® Oralbalance moisturizing liquid and MouthKote® oral moisturizer spray on human enamel measured by quantitative light-induced fluorescence method. M.Sc. Thesis, The University of British Columbia. 2010; 10.14288/1.0071399 [DOI]
  • 18.Ionta FQ, Mendonça FL, de Oliveira GC, de Alencar, Catarina Ribeiro Barros, Honório HM, et al. In vitro assessment of artificial saliva formulations on initial enamel erosion remineralization. Journal of Dentistry 2014;42:175–179 https://doi-org.online.uchc.edu/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.11.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Aykut-Yetkiner A, Wiegand A, Attin T. The effect of saliva substitutes on enamel erosion in vitro. J Dent 2014;42:720–725 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.03.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Delgado AJ, Olafsson VG, Donovan TE. pH and Erosive Potential of Commonly Used Oral Moisturizers. Journal of Prosthodontics 2016;25:39–43 10.1111/jopr.12324 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Hannesson Á, Ósk Þrastardóttir R, Árnadóttir IB, Holbrook WP, Ólafsson VG. Erosive capacity of dry mouth treatments in the Nordic countries. Iceland Dent J. 2016;34(1):19–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Dorozhkin S. V. (2012). Dissolution mechanism of calcium apatites in acids: A review of literature. World journal of methodology, 2(1), 1–17. 10.5662/wjm.v2.i1.1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Aufort J., Gervais C., Ségalen L., Labourdette N., Coelho-Diogo C., Baptiste B., et al. (2019). Atomic scale transformation of bone in controlled aqueous alteration experiments. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 526, 80–95. 10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.03.042 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Yoder C, Pasteris J, Worcester K, Schermerhorn D. Structural Water in Carbonated Hydroxylapatite and Fluorapatite: Confirmation by Solid State 2 H NMR. Calcif Tissue Int 2012;90:60–67 10.1007/s00223-011-9542-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Deymier AC, Nair AK, Depalle B, Qin Z, Arcot K, Drouet C, et al. Protein-free formation of bone-like apatite: New insights into the key role of carbonation. Biomaterials 2017;127:75–88 https://doi-org.online.uchc.edu/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.02.029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Nath D, Singh F, Das R. X-ray diffraction analysis by Williamson-Hall, Halder-Wagner and size-strain plot methods of CdSe nanoparticles- a comparative study. Materials Chemistry and Physics 2020;239:122021 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.122021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Shannon IL, Trodahl JN, Starcke EN. Remineralization of enamel by a saliva substitute designed for use by irradiated patients. Cancer 1978;41:1746‐1750 10.1002/1097-0142(197805)41:5&lt;1746::aid-cncr2820410515&gt;3.0.co;2-c [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Lenander-Lumikari M, Loimaranta V. Saliva and Dental Caries. Adv Dent Res 2000;14:40–47 10.1177/08959374000140010601 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.LeGeros RZ, Trautz OR, LeGeros JP, Klein E, Shirra WP. Apatite Crystallites: Effects of Carbonate on Morphology. Science 1967;155:1409–1411. 10.1126/science.155.3768.1409 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Larsen MJ, Pearce EIF, Jensen SJ. Notes on the Dissolution of Human Dental Enamel in Dilute Acid Solutions at High Solid/Solution Ratio. Caries Res 1993;27:87–95 10.1159/000261523 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bushinsky DA, Smith SB, Gavrilov KL, Gavrilov LF, Li J, Levi-Setti R. Acute acidosis-induced alteration in bone bicarbonate and phosphate. American journal of physiology.Renal physiology 2002;283:F1091 10.1152/ajprenal.00155.2002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Lemann J, Bushinsky DA, Hamm LL. Bone buffering of acid and base in humans. American journal of physiology.Renal physiology 2003;285:F811 10.1152/ajprenal.00115.2003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Schiller C, Epple M. Carbonated calcium phosphates are suitable pH-stabilising fillers for biodegradable polyesters. Biomaterials 2003;24:2037–2043 10.1016/s0142-9612(02)00634-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Wopenka B, Pasteris JD. A mineralogical perspective on the apatite in bone. Materials Science and Engineering: C 2005;25:131–143 10.1016/j.msec.2005.01.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Rey C, Collins B, Goehl T, Dickson IR, Glimcher MJ. The carbonate environment in bone mineral: a resolution-enhanced Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy Study. Calcif Tissue Int 1989;45:157–164 10.1007/BF02556059 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Combes C, Cazalbou S, Rey C. Apatite Biominerals. Minerals 2016;6 10.3390/min6020034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Connecticut State Department of Public Health. Water Fluoridation in Connecticut. Available from: https://portal.ct.gov/DPH/Drinking-Water/DWS/Water-Fluoridation-in-Connecticut, 2020.
  • 38.Gustafson MB, Martin RB, Gibson V, Storms DH, Stover SM, Gibeling J, et al. Calcium buffering is required to maintain bone stiffness in saline solution. Journal of Biomechanics 1996;29:1191–1194 10.1016/0021-9290(96)00020-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Wingender B, Azuma M, Krywka C, Zaslansky P, Boyle J, Deymier A. Carbonate substitution significantly affects the structure and mechanics of carbonated apatites. Acta Biomaterialia; Forthcoming. 10.1016/j.actbio.2021.01.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Biotène: Biotène® Dry Mouth Oral Rinse. Available from: https://www.biotene.com/dry-mouth-products/mouthwash/, 2020.
  • 41.Amerongen N, Oderkerk CH, Driessen AA. Role of Mucins from Human Whole Saliva in the Protection of Tooth Enamel against Demineralization in vitro. Caries Res 1987;21:297–309 10.1159/000261033 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.van der Reijden WA, Buijs MJ, Damen JJM, Veerman ECI, Ten Cate JM, Amerongen N. Influence of Polymers for Use in Saliva Substitutes on De- and Remineralization of Enamel in vitro. Caries Res 1997;31:216–223 10.1159/000262403 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Meyer-Lueckel H, Umland N, Hopfenmuller W, Kielbassa AM. Effect of Mucin Alone and in Combination with Various Dentifrices on in vitro Remineralization. Caries Res 2004;38:478–483 10.1159/000079630 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Kielbassa AM, Oeschger U, Schulte‐Monting J, Meyer‐Lueckel H. Microradiographic study on the effects of salivary proteins on in vitro demineralization of bovine enamel. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:90–96 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01392.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Hahnel S, Behr M, Handel G, Bürgers R. Saliva substitutes for the treatment of radiation-induced xerostomia—a review. Support Care Cancer 2009;17:1331–1343 10.1007/s00520-009-0671-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Meyer-Lueckel H, Hopfenmuller W, Von Klinggraff D, Kielbassa AM. Microradiographic study on the effects of mucin-based solutions used as saliva substitutes on demineralised bovine enamel in vitro. Arch Oral Biol 2006;51:541–547 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2006.01.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Vissink A, S-Gravenmade E, Gelhard T. B. F. M., Panders AK, Franken MH. Rehardening Properties of Mucin- or CMC-Containing Saliva Substitutes on Softened Human Enamel. Caries Res 1985;19:212–218 10.1159/000260846 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.ACT®: ACT® Dry Mouth Mouthwash. Available from: https://www.actoralcare.com/products/act-dry-mouth/act-dry-mouth-mouthwash/, 2020.
  • 49.Rošin-Grget K, Peroš K, Šutej I, Bašić K. The cariostatic mechanisms of fluoride. Acta Medica Academica 2013;42:179–188 10.5644/ama2006-124.85 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Venasakulchai A, Williams NA, Gracia LH, Rees GD. A comparative evaluation of fluoridated and non-fluoridated mouthrinses using a 5-day cycling enamel erosion model. Journal of Dentistry 2010;38:S21–S29 10.1016/S0300-5712(11)70005-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Lafuente B, Downs RT, Yang H, Stone N. Highlights in Mineralogical Crystallography., De Gruyter, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Gross KA, Rodríguez-Lorenzo LM. Sintered hydroxyfluorapatites. Part II: Mechanical properties of solid solutions determined by microindentation. Biomaterials 2004;25:1385–1394 10.1016/s0142-9612(03)00636-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Leventouri T, Antonakos A, Kyriacou A, Venturelli R, Liarokapis E, Perdikatsis V. Crystal structure studies of human dental apatite as a function of age. International journal of biomaterials 2009;2009:698547 10.1155/2009/698547 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Fleet ME. Infrared spectra of carbonate apatites: Evidence for a connection between bone mineral and body fluids. American Mineralogist 2017;102:149–157 10.2138/am-2017-5704 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Oscar Millet

11 Feb 2021

PONE-D-20-33802

Beyond dissolution: xerostomia rinses affect composition and structure of biomimetic dental mineral

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Deymier,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Specifically, there are a number of issues raised by the reviewer, affecting technical aspects of the work that need to be addressed before it can be furthered considered.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 28 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Oscar Millet

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The objective of this study was to elucidate the effects of xerostomia rinse composition on dentin like biomimetic apatites.

The authors applied a multi-technique approach to understanding the effects of four different solutions containing: aqueous bases, high phosphate levels, mucin-like molecules, and fluoride. The combination of mass loss, pH, Raman spectroscopy, Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES), and X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements allowed us to provide a comprehensive view of how these solutions modify dental tissues at a compositional and structural level.

It is an in vitro study and must appear in the title

The study design is not clear to readers. It is very narrative in some sections and should be synthesized

The authors use biotene and APC substances with different and many different active compounds are difficult to assess. Purified Water,Glycerin,Xylitol,Sorbitol, Propylene Glycol,Poloxamer ,sodium Benzoate…Hydroxyethyl Cellulose,Zingiber officinale (ginger) root extract,Angelica polymorpha sinensis root extract,Lactic acid,……………

Another limitation is that A-type CO3 substitutions are not accounted for in this study.

As strengths is the use of different techniques and some very interesting

Graphics have poor quality

I should provide some figure of the raman with the different components

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Apr 26;16(4):e0250822. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250822.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


27 Mar 2021

Reviewer #1:

Comment 1: The objective of this study was to elucidate the effects of xerostomia rinse composition on dentin like biomimetic apatites. The authors applied a multi-technique approach to understanding the effects of four different solutions containing: aqueous bases, high phosphate levels, mucin-like molecules, and fluoride. The combination of mass loss, pH, Raman spectroscopy, Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES), and X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements allowed us to provide a comprehensive view of how these solutions modify dental tissues at a compositional and structural level.

Thank you for the supportive comments. We appreciate your understanding of the value of examining the effect of clinically relevant xerostomia treatments on the behavior of biomimetic apatites for dental health.

Comment 1: It is an in vitro study and must appear in the title

We agree with the reviewer and have changed the title to read “Beyond dissolution: xerostomia rinses affect composition and structure of biomimetic dental mineral in vitro”.

Comment 2: The study design is not clear to readers. It is very narrative in some sections and should be synthesized.

We have made extensive revisions to the text in both organization and format to clarify the study design. The methods and discussion sections were rewritten to eliminate unnecessary verbiage and detail in order to reduce the prior narrative nature. Please see the manuscript with all tracked changed near the end of this document.

Comment 3: The authors use biotene and APC substances with different and many different active compounds are difficult to assess. Purified Water,Glycerin,Xylitol,Sorbitol, Propylene Glycol,Poloxamer ,sodium Benzoate…Hydroxyethyl Cellulose,Zingiber officinale (ginger) root extract,Angelica polymorpha sinensis root extract,Lactic acid,……………

Thank you for your comment regarding the different ingredients. We agree with the reviewer that the additional components in the Biotene and ACT rinses complicate the exact mechanisms of dissolution/recrystallization of CHA in these two solutions. With that in mind, we wanted the solutions to be clinically relevant. This has been emphasized in the introduction on page 2-3, which now reads:

“As a result, the current available research fails to truly elucidate the effect of oral rinse composition on dissolution and ignores the effect of these treatments on the remaining tooth mineral composition and structure. In addition, basic science studies examining the effects of specific ions/molecules on mineral content fail to provide clear clinically-relevant relationships about current treatment options.

In this study, we seek to elucidate the effect of clinically-relevant oral rinse composition on the dissolution, composition and structure of biomimetic dental apatites. We applied a multi-technique approach to understand the effects of four different clinically-relevant solutions containing: aqueous bases, high phosphate levels, mucin-like molecules, and fluoride.”

This is also emphasized in the methods sections on page 3-4 under the “Preparation of solutions” section:

“To determine the effects of oral rinse composition on biomimetic dental mineral, four solutions were selected: (1) Tap water (aqueous base) (2) 1X phosphate buffered saline (PBS - aqueous base with additional phosphate), (3) Biotène Dry Mouth Oral Rinse® (mucin like containing - MLC), and (4) ACT® Anticavity Total Fluoride Mouthwash (fluoride containing - FC). The tap water was sourced from the Farmington, CT water supply. PBS was diluted from 10X PBS (Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) in MilliQ water. Biotène and ACT oral rinses were purchased from a local pharmacy. Biotène and ACT represent some of the most prescribed oral rinses for xerostomia. Although they have complex compositions, these 2 solutions were selected for the presence of mucin-like molecules such as hydroxyethyl cellulose in Biotène and the presence of high levels of fluoride in ACT (Table S1), making them unique and clinically-relevant solutions.”

We chose not to address the role of the many ingredients in Biotene and ACT that may play in dissolution/reprecipitation. This was in part due to low concentrations of the ingredients or previous literature data suggesting a lack of any effect. While we do not know the precise concentration of certain ingredients in the solutions due to patent rights, we do know the order of ingredients on the label, which are in the order of greatest concentration to lowest concentration [1]. The first 8 ingredients in Biotene are largely responsible for solution mouthfeel, taste, and solubility (Table S1). For example, poloxamer 407 is a surfactant [2], sodium benzoate is a preservative [2], xylitol/sorbitol are sugar-substitutes [3], and the viscosity of glycerin serves as an emulsifier and improves mouth feel [4,5]. There is limited or no information relating these compounds as well as others like parabens, root and flower extracts, and food coloring, to tooth dissolution and recrystallization. However, we do have some information about how some interact with tooth structures and dental health.

The possible anti-cariogenic properties of xylitol and sorbitol have been extensively studied. It is suggested that these properties likely have to do with their interactions with oral bacteria; however, the literature results are mixed [3,6–12]. There is some evidence that xylitol may act as a Ca2+ transporter and affect mineralization [11]; however, the American Dental Association (ADA) currently classifies the xylitol data as insufficient [13]. Lactic acid in ACT might also be expected to have a demineralizing effect [14]. This might be in part responsible for the lower unmodified pH of the solution, although its position in the list of ingredients suggests a low concentration. Any acidification would be measured from the pH evaluations in this study. Food colorings, known as extrinsic chemogens, have been shown to accumulate in the surface deposits of teeth, specifically in the acquired pellicle layer [15,16]. We found that none of our powders exhibited a color change after exposure to the oral rinse solutions, likely due to a lack of pellicle layer in our in vitro powder model. While many of the ingredients in Biotene overlap with those in ACT, a notable exception is the addition of hydroxyethyl cellulose in Biotene. This mucin-like molecule has been implicated in the dissolution/remineralization mechanisms in previous studies as stated on page 17-18, making this a probable component of changing apatite properties. The role of hydroxyethyl cellulose in our studies remains unclear. Comparisons of Raman spectra of the apatites before and after exposure, as well as spectra from Biotene and ACT showed that there was generally no binding of additional components onto the apatites after rinsing. In a few cases however, Biotene exposed samples did exhibit Biotene associated peaks that match the spectra of hydroxyethyl cellulose [17] after a single rinse with Millipore water (Figure 1 ,figures are shown in the response to reviewers document at the end of this document). However, the Raman spectra of CHA showed no peaks from Biotene after a second rinse. The powders did not exhibit variations in crystal lattice suggesting the incorporation of large molecules, as shown by their XRD patterns (Figure 2). This suggests that there might be weak bonding between the hydroxyethyl cellulose and the apatite surfaces. This has led us to suggest on page 17-18 that interactions between this mucin-like molecule and the apatite in solution may serve as a protective coating during dissolution/recrystallization processes.

In ACT, the first ingredient listed is 0.02% NaF (Table S1). Fluoride has long been known to substitute into apatite lattices to form fluorapatite, which exhibits decreased solubility and increased resistance to caries. We therefore propose that the biggest influencer of apatite dissolution/recrystallization process in ACT is the fluoride. Peaks shifts, decreases in peak width in our XRD data, as well as the significant carbonate loss from our Raman data indicate that there is a transition from the carbonated apatite to the more crystalline fluorapatite (Figure 2). This supports our theory that fluoride acts as a primary contributor to apatite dissolution/recrystallization behaviors.

Based on the current available literature and our goal to elucidate the effects of the rinses as a whole on dissolution of dental mineral, we suggest that fluoride and MLCs are likely the most relevant components in the dissolution/recrystallization mechanisms of CHA in ACT and Biotene, respectively. This is concisely addressed in the discussion under “Experimental limitations” on page 19, which reads: “While there are other ingredients in the FC and MLC rinses that could be affecting the dissolution seen in these experiments, the interactions between mucin-like molecules and fluoride on teeth have been previously shown to have the greatest effect on apatite mineral; therefore, we have chosen to focus on these factors instead of the many additional ingredients. We believe that this study plays a crucial role in beginning to elucidate properties of these components.”

Although it would be of great interest to examine the effects of each individual component, it is beyond the scope of this paper, whose goal was to elucidate how the rinses as a whole elicit clinically relevant dissolution responses on dental mineral.

Comment 4: Another limitation is that A-type CO3 substitutions are not accounted for in this study.

We agree that it is important to understand how the carbonate is distributed across the crystals during dissolution and recrystallization, as changes in the amount and location of carbonate substitutions can significantly affect the structure, morphology, solubility, mechanics, and buffering ability of apatites [18–20]. Historically, B-type substitutions have been found to be the most prominent type of carbonate substitutions in biological apatites [21] due to its lower energy barrier for formation18. Conversely, A-type carbonate is more present in geologic and synthetic apatites exposed to high temperature and pressure conditions [22–24]. Since we create our apatites at 60℃ at local atmospheric pressure, this suggests that A-type carbonate is not the primary substitution involved in our teeth. However, there has been growing debate about the validity of methods like Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), and Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA) to identify differences in A- and B-type apatites.

Overlapping of FTIR peaks associated with B-, A- and labile (A2) carbonates in apatites can make it difficult to deconvolute individual peaks [25] (Figure 3). Our unpublished work with Dr. Claude Yoder examining bone apatites with FTIR has shown that relative amounts of A- vs B- type CO3 can vary depending on whether we deconvolve the v2 CO3 or the v3 CO3 peaks of the apatite. However, our XRD data, in agreement with other studies on biological apatites, indicate that our apatite models are more B-type apatites [26,27].

We are currently expanding our research interests to include the roles of A- and B- type carbonate on apatite dissolution/recrystallization and buffering using FTIR. We are also applying Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) to further differentiate A-type carbonate levels. Although extremely interesting, these additional techniques are beyond the scope of this work. We have identified the lack of information about carbonate location in the paper on page 19 which reads:

“Another limitation is that A-type CO32- substitutions are not accounted for in this study. Although small quantities of A-type CO32- are present in bones and teeth, B-type CO32- substitutions are predominantly found in these tissues [25; 53; 54], similar to our synthesized apatites. The changes in the lattice spacing from XRD indeed indicates that the bulk of the substitutions are B-type CO32- in our system and not A-type CO32-. However, Raman is unable to distinguish between the two substitution types making it difficult to determine the role of A-type CO32- in this study.”

Comment 5: Graphics have poor quality

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The figures appeared blurry at submission but were of acceptable quality when the links were clicked. We have resubmitted the figures with even higher resolution here to hopefully address this issue.

Comment 6: I should provide some figure of the raman with the different components

We appreciate this comment. We see the added value of including the Raman spectra of the apatites in the different solutions to our figures. We included the spectra of 6% carbonated apatite in all 4 solutions at pH 5.5 to Figure 5. The shift of the v1 PO4 peak at 960 cm-1 in the ACT sample as well as the narrowing of the peaks will further validate our findings regarding the fluoride contribution to CHA dissolution/recrystallization to a more fluorinated apatite.

This has been referred to in the section titled “Fluoride in FC solution promoted reprecipitation of fluorapatite” on page 18, which reads:

“However, in this case the reprecipitated crystal is not a low-carbonate apatite, but fluorapatite, as suggested by the peak shift of the v1 PO4 in the Raman spectra (Fig. 5E). In addition, comparison of XRD spectra with standards from the PDF 2001 library showed that the post-exposure powders exhibit a greater resemblance to fluorapatite than carbonated apatite. The decrease in both dC and dA supports this removal of CO32- and formation of fluorapatite since fluorapatite exhibits a smaller dA than carbonated apatites [49]. This phase change decreased εRMS and increased crystal size, as expected for the more crystalline fluorapatite. This reprecipitation also resulted in a decrease in solution phosphorus levels as it was likely taken up to form fluorapatite crystals (Fig. 8). Since fluorapatite has a lower density than hydroxyapatite, this may explain the larger mass loss with FC rinse exposure. Overall, this highlights the need to look beyond dissolution alone to understand how dental mineral will be affected by solution exposure.”

REFERENCES:

1. FDA. Why Are Food and Color Ingredients Added to Food? https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/ucm094249.pdf 1–13 (2010).

2. Chemical, S. Mouthwash Ingredients. spec-001_ds_mouthwash_v3_new.pdf.

3. Maguire, A. & Rugg-Gunn, A. J. Xylitol and caries prevention-is it a magic bullet? BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL VOLUME vol. 194 (2003).

4. Becker, L. C. et al. Expert Panel Safety Assessments Safety Assessment of Glycerin as Used in Cosmetics. doi:10.1177/1091581819883820.

5. Padmawar, A., Bhadoriya, U. & Padmawar, A. R. GLYCOL AND GLYCERIN: PIVOTAL ROLE IN HERBAL INDUSTRY AS SOLVENT/CO-SOLVENT. www.wjpmr.com (2018).

6. Riley, P., Moore, D., Ahmed, F., Sharif, M. O. & Worthington, H. V. Xylitol and Caries prevention. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews vol. 2015 (2015).

7. Gonçalves, N. C. L. A. V et al. Effect of xylitol:sorbitol on fluoride enamel demineralization reduction in situ. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2005.12.008.

8. Cardoso, C. A. B. et al. Effect of xylitol varnishes on remineralization of artificial enamel caries lesions in vitro. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.08.009.

9. Chunmuang, S., Jitpukdeebodintra, S., Chuenarrom, C. & Benjakul, P. Effect of xylitol and fluoride on enamel erosion in vitro. J. Oral Sci. 49, 293–297 (2007).

10. Rochel, I. D. et al. Effect of experimental xylitol and fluoride-containing dentifrices on enamel erosion with or without abrasion in vitro. J. Oral Sci. 53, 163–168 (2011).

11. Miake, Y., Saeki, Y., Takahashi, M. & Yanagisawa, T. Remineralization effects of xylitol on demineralized enamel. Journal of Electron Microscopy vol. 52 https://academic.oup.com/jmicro/article/52/5/471/1044146 (2003).

12. Tuncer, D., Onen, A. & Yazici, A. R. Effect of chewing gums with xylitol, sorbitol and xylitol-sorbitol on the remineralization and hardness of initial enamel lesions in situ. Dent. Res. J. (Isfahan). 11, 537–43 (2014).

13. New research shows clinical evidence unclear on effects of xylitol products preventing dental caries. https://www.ada.org/en/publications/ada-news/2015-archive/march/new-research-shows-clinical-evidence-unclear-on-effects-of-xylitol-products-preventing-dental-carie (2015).

14. Harper, R. A. et al. Acid-induced demineralisation of human enamel as a function of time and pH observed using X-ray and polarised light imaging. Acta Biomater. 120, 240–248 (2020).

15. Addy, M. & Moran, J. MECHANISMS OF STAIN FORMATION ON TEETH, IN PARTICULAR ASSOCIATED WITH METAL IONS AND ANTISEPTICS. Adv Dent Res vol. 9 (1995).

16. Watts, A. & Addy, M. Tooth discolouration and staining: A review of the literature. Br. Dent. J. 190, 309–316 (2001).

17. John Wiley & Sons, I. S. SpectraBase Compound. ID=J4sEjBlmZV SpectraBase.

18. Madupalli, H., Pavan, B. & Tecklenburg, M. M. J. Carbonate substitution in the mineral component of bone: Discriminating the structural changes, simultaneously imposed by carbonate in A and B sites of apatite. J. Solid State Chem. 255, 27–35 (2017).

19. Peccati, F., Bernocco, C., Ugliengo, P. & Corno, M. Properties and Reactivity toward Water of A Type Carbonated Apatite and Hydroxyapatite Surfaces. J. Phys. Chem. C 122, 3934–3944 (2018).

20. Yoder, C. H., Stepien, K. R. & Edner, T. M. A new model for the rationalization of the thermal behavior of carbonated apatites. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 140, 2179–2184 (2020).

21. Bigi, A. et al. Chemical and structural characterization of the mineral phase from cortical and trabecular bone. J. Inorg. Biochem. 68, 45–51 (1997).

22. Tacker, R. C. & Chris Tacker, R. Carbonate in igneous and metamorphic fluorapatite: Two type A and two type B substitutions. Am. Mineral. 93, 168–176 (2008).

23. Fleet, M. E. & Liu, X. Location of type B carbonate ion in type A-B carbonate apatite synthesized at high pressure. J. Solid State Chem. 177, 3174–3182 (2004).

24. Kubota, T., Nakamura, A., Toyoura, K. & Matsunaga, K. The effect of chemical potential on the thermodynamic stability of carbonate ions in hydroxyapatite. Acta Biomater. 10, 3716–3722 (2014).

25. Spizzirri, P. G., Cochrane, N. J., Prawer, S. & Reynolds, E. C. A Comparative Study of Carbonate Determination in Human Teeth Using Raman Spectroscopy. Caries Res. 46, 353–360 (2012).

26. Akkus, O., Adar, F. & Schaffler, M. B. Age-related changes in physicochemical properties of mineral crystals are related to impaired mechanical function of cortical bone. Bone 34, 443–453 (2004).

27. Deymier, A. C. et al. Protein-free formation of bone-like apatite: New insights into the key role of carbonation. Biomaterials 127, 75–88 (2017).

28. Aufort, J. et al. Atomic scale transformation of bone in controlled aqueous alteration experiments. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 526, 80–95 (2019).

Attachment

Submitted filename: 210327_ResponsetoReviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Oscar Millet

15 Apr 2021

Beyond dissolution: xerostomia rinses affect composition and structure of biomimetic dental mineral in vitro

PONE-D-20-33802R1

Dear Dr. Deymier,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Oscar Millet

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: well done .

Changes have been made properly

Comment 1: It is an in vitro study and must appear in the title OK

The study design is not clear to readers. It is very narrative in some sections and should be synthesized . Has been added

The authors use biotene and APC substances with different and many different active compounds are difficult to assess. Has been added

Comment 4: Another limitation is that A-type CO3 substitutions are not accounted for in this study OK

Graphics have poor quality : Has been changed

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Acceptance letter

Oscar Millet

16 Apr 2021

PONE-D-20-33802R1

Beyond dissolution: xerostomia rinses affect composition and structure of biomimetic dental mineral in vitro

Dear Dr. Deymier:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Oscar Millet

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Change in crystallite size after solution exposure.

    CAP has variations in crystal size after exposure to water, suggesting that the internal structure does not change (A). The crystallite size of CAP increased in PBS, MLC, and FC, indicating that CAP is becoming more crystalline after exposure (B-D). Error bars account for standard deviations related to the slope derived from the Halder-Wagner equation.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Change in sodium after exposure.

    An increase in sodium in water may be due to a low sodium content in the pre-exposure water and indicates that CAP is releasing sodium during exposure (A). The amount of sodium in solution varied in PBS, MLC, and FC irrespective of pHi and powder carbonate content (B-D).

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. Change in potassium in the solution after exposure.

    Potassium generally increased in PBS, revealing that apatite is releasing potassium (B). The opposite is shown for FC, where the decrease in potassium suggests that CAP is up taking into the structure during recrystallization to account for charge balance of the crystals (D). MLC and water were variable, implying that potassium has little effect in these solutions (A, C).

    (TIF)

    S1 Table. List of ingredients for Biotene and ACT.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: 210327_ResponsetoReviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES