Table 3 The influence of saliva collection methods on salivary biomarkers

Drooling, SOS, Salivette®, Synthetic, and Greiner Bio-One Saliva Collection System (SCS)

SOS yielded lower concentrations of myoglobin and CRP

the Salivette® Cotton and Synthetic swab yielded lower myoglobin and IgE concentrations

²⁸⁸

Drooling, paraffin gum, and Salivette®

Saliva volume: paraffin gum > Salivette® > drooling

protein concentrations: no significant differences

proteome coverage: about 160 proteins of each approach

specific proteins depended on the collection approach: observed

²⁸⁹

Stimulated by Salivette®, Parafilm®, chewing gum, and unstimulated from spit with and without fluid accumulation

Flow rate: chewing gum > Salivette® = Parafilm® > unstimulated

total protein: chewing gum > Parafilm® > others

nitrite secretion: chewing gum > others

total antioxidant capacity: chewing gum > others

alpha-amylase concentration: unstimulated without saliva accumulation < stimulated

²⁹⁰

Before and after oral hygiene

Oral hygiene decreased salivary flow, reduced the secretion rate of total protein and increased sAA

²⁹⁰

Salivette® and spiting

Visual similar MS spectra for each individual

²⁹¹

RNAPro·SAL™ and standard clinical collection process

Similar protein and exRNA recovery and stability

²⁹²

Passive drooling, Pure·SAL™, and RNAPro·SAL™

Pure·Sal™ and RNAPro·Sal™ resulted in much clearer protein spots in comparison to passive drooling

²⁹³

Spitting and drooling

No signifcant diferences in bacterial profles

²⁹⁴

Spitting and drooling

No significant influence on periodontium-associated mRNA expression, DNA methylation levels and epigenetic factors

²⁹³

GeneFiX Saliva DNA Collection Kit

Drinking or eating right before collection does not influence the quantity or quality of the isolated DNA

²⁹⁶

Salivette® with and without stimulation

Compared with unstimulated saliva, stimulated saliva had decreased glucose levels and increased salivary flow.

³⁰³