| Literature DB >> 35048015 |
Jasmine Wong1, Daniel Manoil2, Peggy Näsman2, Georgios N Belibasakis2, Prasanna Neelakantan1.
Abstract
The oral cavity is the habitat of several hundreds of microbial taxa that have evolved to coexist in multispecies communities in this unique ecosystem. By contrast, the internal tissue of the tooth, i.e., the dental pulp, is a physiologically sterile connective tissue in which any microbial invasion is a pathological sign. It results in inflammation of the pulp tissue and eventually to pulp death and spread of inflammation/infection to the periradicular tissues. Over the past few decades, substantial emphasis has been placed on understanding the pathobiology of root canal infections, including the microbial composition, biofilm biology and host responses to infections. To develop clinically effective treatment regimens as well as preventive therapies, such extensive understanding is necessary. Rather surprisingly, despite the definitive realization that root canal infections are biofilm mediated, clinical strategies have been focused more on preparing canals to radiographically impeccable levels, while much is left desired on the debridement of these complex root canal systems. Hence, solely focusing on "canal shaping" largely misses the point of endodontic treatment as the current understanding of the microbial aetiopathogenesis of apical periodontitis calls for the emphasis to be placed on "canal cleaning" and chemo-mechanical disinfection. In this review, we dissect in great detail, the current knowledge on the root canal microbiome, both in terms of its composition and functional characteristics. We also describe the challenges in root canal disinfection and the novel strategies that attempt to address this challenge. Finally, we provide some critical pointers for areas of future research, which will serve as an important area for consideration in Frontiers in Oral Health.Entities:
Keywords: biofilm; disinfection; irrigation; metaproteome; metatranscriptome; microbiome
Year: 2021 PMID: 35048015 PMCID: PMC8757850 DOI: 10.3389/froh.2021.672887
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oral Health ISSN: 2673-4842
Overview of the studies included that investigated the root canal microbiota by means of 16S rRNA gene next-generation sequencing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Microbial outcome | Asymptomatic PIs (roots) vs. symptomatic AA (pus) | PIs' microbiota | Oral swabs vs. AA-associated roots and pus | Coronal vs. apical root segments in PI's | PIs vs. SPI |
| 16S variable regions | V4 | V1–V3 | V1–V2 | V5–V6 | V1–V3 |
| Taxa id. (OTUs) | 916 | 187 | 325 | 606 | 803 |
| Sampling method. | |||||
| Main findings | 13 phyla subdivided into 67 genera. 20 genera exclusively in pus from AAs and 18 in PIs. 18% of the 165 OTUs detected in both pus and PI-associated root canal. | 84 genera belonging to 10 phyla detected. Majority were low-abundant OTUs. Important interindividual variation in the composition of the apical microbiota. | 11 Phyla detected. Lower bacterial diversity in AAs root canals and pus than in oral swabs. | 24 bacterial phyla detected, Proteobacteria more abundant in apical segments and Actinobacteria more abundant coronal. Apical segments displayed higher diversity than the coronal segments. | 10 phyla subdivide into 148 genera. No significant differences in bacterial composition between PIs and SPI. |
| Main phyla (max. top 6) | In PIs: Firmicutes (59%), Bacteroidetes (14%), Actinobacteria (10%), Fusobacteria, Proteobacteria, Spirochetes. | Proteobacteria (43%), Firmicutes (25%), Fusobacteria (16%), Bacteriodetes (9%), Actinobacteria (5%), Synergistetes. | Firmicutes (21.6%), Bacteroidetes, Fusobacteria, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Synergistetes. | Firmicutes (48%), Actinobacteria (30%), Bacteroidetes (12%), Acidobacteria, BRC1, Chlamydiae. | In both infection types: Bacteriodetes (29.6%), Firmicutes (23.2%), Actinobacteria (10.5%), Fusobacteria (13.1%), Protobacteria (8.8%), Synergistetes (6.3%). |
| Main genera/species (max. top 12) | In PIs: | In PIs: | |||
|
| |||||
| Microbial outcome measured | Symptomatic vs. asymptomatic SPIs | PIs vs. SPIs vs. AAs | PIs vs. SPIs. | PIs vs. periodontal pockets in cases of endo-perio lesions | Apical segments of SPIs |
| 16S variable regions | V1–V2 | V6 | V1–V2 | V3–V4 | V4 |
| Total taxa id. (OTUs) | 741 | PIs: 36; SPIs: 43; AAs: 45 | 339 | 289 | 538 |
| Sampling method. | |||||
| Main findings | Symptomatic SPIs had more Firmicutes and Fusobacteria than asymptomatic ones. In turn, asymptomatic SPIs exhibited more Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria. | Highly diverse microbiota in all infection types. | Bacteroidetes most abundant phylum in both infection types. Different bacterial compositions in symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. SPIs significantly enriched with Proteobacteria and Tenericutes as compared to PIs. 14 genera differentially abundant between PIs and SPIs. | Firmicutes most abundant in all sampling sites. | 11 phyla subdivided into 103 genera. |
| Main phyla (max. top 6) | Firmicutes (29.9%), Proteobacteria (26.1%), Actinobacteria (22.72%), Bacteroidetes (13.31%) and Fusobacteria (4.55%). | In all infection types: Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, Bacteriodetes, Fusobacteria, Proteobacteria, Synergistetes. | In all infection types: Bacteroidetes (36.2%), Firmicutes (32.9%), Actinobacteria (8.1%), Synergistetes (7.4%), Fusobacteria (7.4%), Proteobacteria (5.2%). | In PIs: Firmicutes (75.09%), Proteobacteria (7.85%), Actinobacteria (7.01%), Bacteroidetes (6.77%) | Proteobacteria (46%), Firmicutes (18%), Fusobacteria (15%) and Actinobacteria (8%) |
| Main genera/species (max. top 12) | No relative abundances were reported for any of the genera detected. | PIs enriched with: Bacteroidaceae_unclassified, | In PIs: | ||
|
| |||||
| Microbial outcome | In PIs: microbiota vs. mycobiome and coronal vs. apical root segments | PIs vs. SPIs | SPIs | PIs vs. aSPIs | |
| 16S variable regions | V3–V4 | V4 | V3–V5 | V3–V4 | |
| Total taxa id. (OTUs) | 338 | Not specified | 152 | 347 | |
| Sampling method. | |||||
| Main findings | Coronal and apical root segments had similar microbiome and mycobiome. No correlations between microbiota and mycobiomes. | 160 genera belonging to 15 phyla were detected. PIs and SPIs displayed no significant differences in microbiota composition. | 125 bacterial species belonging to 68 genera and 9 phyla were detected. | 18 phyla subdivided into 177 genera. Microbiotas were differentially abundant in each infection type. Co-occurrence analysis demonstrated microbial interactions specific to each infection type. | |
| Main phyla (max. top 6) | No phylum level assessment | Proteobacteria (33.4%), Firmicutes (32.3%), Bacteroidetes (26.3%), Fusobacteria (4.2%), and Actinobacteria (2.9%) | Prior to disinfection: Firmicutes (47%), Fusobacteria (14%), Bacteroidetes (12%), Proteobacteria (12%), Actinobacteria (9%), Synergistetes (4%) | Firmicute (PI 36/SPI 48.4%), Bacteroidetes (PI 23.8/SPI 9.5%), Actinobacteria (PI 6.4/SPI 23.4%), Fusobacteria (PI 16/SPI 5.6%), Synergistetes (PI 9.9/SPI 4.5%), Proteobacteria (PI 2.4/SPI 4.8%) | |
| Main genera/species (max. top 12) | PIs-microbiota: | Prior to disinfection: |
AA, apical abscess; OTU, operational taxonomic unit; PI, primary infection; SPI, secondary/persistent infection.