| Literature DB >> 31452955 |
Alexandre R Vieira1, N Luisa Hiller2,3, Evan Powell2, Leon Hak-Jin Kim3, Tracy Spirk2, Adriana Modesto4, Rachael Kreft2.
Abstract
Objectives: Dental caries is a highly prevalent infectious disease that causes tooth decay. While no single bacterial species is causative of dental caries, the role of the oral microbiome in oral health and caries is gaining interest. The purpose of this study is to compare the major species present in whole saliva samples from caries-free and caries-active children using the IBIS Universal Biosensor. Material andEntities:
Keywords: IBIS Universal Biosensor; Streptococcus; caries; microbiota; whole saliva
Year: 2019 PMID: 31452955 PMCID: PMC6704248 DOI: 10.1002/cre2.206
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Exp Dent Res ISSN: 2057-4347
Information on patient population
| Median age | 13 |
| Percent male | 53 |
| Percent Caucasian | 22 |
| Percent African American | 61 |
| DMFT median | 2 |
| DMFT range | 0–17 |
Figure 1Characterization of the abundant species in whole saliva using PCR‐MS.
(a) Genera detected by PCR‐MS. (b) Most common genera and species encountered in the 95 subjects. Columns represent subjects. Rows represent species or genus, where blue denotes absence, yellow presence, and red presence of bacteria and the mecA gene coding for methicillin resistance. Columns are sorted into two age groups, separated by a red line. Each group is sorted into three levels of caries experience, separated by black lines. Age 6–12 categories are none/DMFT = 0; low/DMFT = 1–3; high/DMFT = 4 or higher; and age 13–19: none/DMFT = 0; low/DMFT = 1–6; high/DMFT = 7 or higher. The numbers on the right margin are total number of subjects with the respective species or genus (note that some subjects have multiple species from a single genus)
Description of oral health measurements and distribution over subject set
| Caries experience level | Number of individuals |
|---|---|
| Children (from 6 to 12 years of age) | 39 |
| None: DMFT = 0 | 14 |
| Low: DMFT = 1–3 | 19 |
| High: DMFT = 4 or higher | 6 |
| Teenagers (from 13 to 19 years of age) | 56 |
| None: DMFT = 0 | 6 |
| Low: DMFT = 1 | 33 |
| High: DMFT = 7 or higher | 17 |
Analysis of the associations between species and oral health
| All | Child | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | DMFT | Present | Absent | RR | Lower CI | Higher CI | Present | Absent | RR | Lower CI | Higher CI |
|
| HighNone | 3 | 20 | 1.463 | 0.769 | 2.782 | 2 | 4 | 2.833 | 0.877 | 9.151 |
| 1 | 19 | 1 | 13 | ||||||||
|
| HighNone | 7 | 16 | 1.444 | 0.844 | 2.470 | 0 | 6 | 0.000 | 0.000 | NA |
| 3 | 17 | 2 | 12 | ||||||||
|
| HighNone | 11 | 12 | 0.875 | 0.501 | 1.529 | 5 | 1 | 3.333 | 0.473 | 23.471 |
| 11 | 9 | 7 | 7 | ||||||||
|
| HighNone | 3 | 20 | 1.463 | 0.769 | 2.782 | 1 | 5 | 1.800 | 0.373 | 8.681 |
| 1 | 19 | 1 | 13 | ||||||||
|
| HighNone | 3 | 20 | 0.436 | 0.160 | 1.188 | 0 | 6 | 0.000 | 0.000 | NA |
| 8 | 12 | 4 | 10 | ||||||||
|
| HighNone | 16 | 7 | 0.885 | 0.492 | 1.592 | 4 | 2 | 0.667 | 0.171 | 2.604 |
| 15 | 5 | 11 | 3 | ||||||||
|
| HighNone | 11 | 12 | 0.875 | 0.501 | 1.529 | 2 | 4 | 0.500 | 0.117 | 2.139 |
| 11 | 9 | 8 | 6 | ||||||||
Note. Relative risk (RR) was used to measure the relative risk of cavities being associate with presence of a single species. RR > 1 denotes higher risk of cavities with presence of species, whereas RR < 1 a lower risk of cavities with presence of species. The confidence intervals (CI) serve to estimate the true relative risk in the population (vs. the sample set). The confidence level was set at 95%. NA: non‐applicable due to very low numbers.
Taxa displaying negative associations within whole saliva
| Taxa 1 | No | Taxa 2 | No | Co‐occurrences |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 50 | Streptococci excluding | 29 | 9 | 0.005 |
|
| 14 | Staphylococcus excluding | 26 | 0 | 0.008 |
|
| 14 |
| 18 | 0 | 0.041 |
|
| 27 |
| 41 | 6 | 0.008 |
|
| 31 |
| 70 | 18 | 0.017 |
Abbreviation: No: number of occurrences.
Figure 2Comparison of PCR‐MS and 16S rRNA sequencing for three subjects. (a) Phyla identified by 16S rRNA sequencing. (b) Genera identified by 16S rRNA sequencing. (c) Comparison between PCR‐MS and 16S rRNA sequencing analysis for three samples