Cytogenetic damage induced by mouthrinses formulations in vivo and in vitro

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Carlin, Viviane [UNIFESP]
Matsumoto, Mariza A.
Saraiva, Patricia P.
Artioli, Andre
Oshima, Celina Tizuko Fujiyama [UNIFESP]
Ribeiro, Daniel Araki [UNIFESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
The aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate DNA damage and cellular death in cells exposed to various commercially available mouthrinses: ListerineA (R) CepacolA (R), Plax alcohol freeA (R), PeriogardA (R), and Plax WhiteningA (R). A total of 75 volunteers were included in the search distributed into five groups containing 15 people each for in vivo study. Exfoliated buccal mucosa cells were collected immediately before mouthrinse exposure and after 2 weeks. Furthermore, blood samples were obtained from three healthy donors for in vitro study. the micronucleus test was used to evaluate mutagenicity and cytotoxicity in vivo. the single-cell gel (comet) assay was used to determine DNA damage in vitro. After 2 weeks exposure, PeriogardA (R) showed 1.8% of micronucleated cells with significant statistical differences ( < 0.05) compared to before exposure (0.27%). Plax WhiteningA (R) presented high tail moment value (4.5) when compared to negative control (0.6). the addition of all mouthrinses to cells incubated with methyl methanesulfonate did not alter the number of strand breaks in the genetic material. ListerineA (R) was able to reduce genetic damage induced by hydrogen peroxide because a decrease of tail moment was noticed. the results of the present study suggest that PeriogardA (R) and Plax WhiteningA (R) can induce genetic damage, whereas ListerineA (R) is an antioxidant agent. Since DNA damage is considered to be prime mechanism during chemical carcinogenesis, these data may be relevant in risk assessment for protecting human health and preventing carcinogenesis.
Clinical Oral Investigations. Heidelberg: Springer Heidelberg, v. 16, n. 3, p. 813-820, 2012.