Skip to main content
Dental Research Journal logoLink to Dental Research Journal
. 2012 Dec;9(Suppl 2):S139–S141. doi: 10.4103/1735-3327.109723

Lab-Test® 4: Dental caries and bacteriological analysis

Francesca Cura 1,, Annalisa Palmieri 2, Ambra Girardi 1, Marcella Martinelli 1, Luca Scapoli 1, Francesco Carinci 2
PMCID: PMC3692161  PMID: 23814571

Abstract

Dental caries is one of the most common infectious ultifactorial diseases worldwide, characterized by the progressive demineralization of the tooth, following the action of bacterial acid metabolism. The main factors predisposing the onset of the carious process are: 1) the presence of bacterial species able to lower the pH until critical values of 5.5, 2) the absence of adequate oral hygiene, 3) an inefficient immune response anti-caries, 4) the type of alimentary diet and 5) the structure of the teeth. Among the 200 bacterial species isolated from dental plaque the most pathogenic for dental caries are: Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sobrinus, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Actinomices viscusus and Bifidobacterium dentium. Our laboratory (LAB® s.r.l., Codigoro, Ferrara, Italy) has developed a test for absolute and relative quantification of the most common oral cariogenic bacteria. The test uses specific primers and probes for the amplification of bacteria genome sequences in Polymerase Chain Reaction Real Time. The results provide a profile of patient infection, helpful for improving the diagnosis and planning of preventive treatment to reduce the bacterial load.

Keywords: Bacteria, dental caries, real-time polymerase chain reaction


Dental caries is one of the most common infectious multifactorial diseases worldwide, characterized by the progressive demineralization of the tooth, following the action of bacterial acid metabolism.[1]

The main factors predisposing the onset of the carious process are: 1) the presence of bacterial species able to lower the pH until critical values of 5.5, 2) the absence of adequate oral hygiene, 3) an inefficient immune response anti-caries, 4) the type of alimentary diet and 5) the structure of the teeth.[2,3,4]

Sucrose is the most cariogenic carbohydrate present in the diet, because, in addition to being fermented, it is also the substrate for the synthesis of extracellular polysaccharide (EPS),[5] which favors the bacterial adhesion to the tooth surfaces modifying the matrix biofilm.[6]

Among the 200bacterial species isolated from dental plaque the most pathogenic for dental caries are: Streptococcus mutans (serotypes C, E and F), Streptococcus sobrinus (serotype C and G),[7] Lactobacillus acidophilus,[8] Actinomices viscusus and Bifidobacterium dentium.[9,10]

These bacteria are defined acid-tolerant because they are able to survive in strong acid medium. They join to the tooth surface, metabolizing carbohydrates and producing organic acids that cause drastic lowering of the pH, resulting in the demineralization of tooth enamel.[11]

An uncontrolled increase in bacterial load leads to infiltration of the dentin and infection of the soft tissue of the pulp, causing excruciating pain, necrosis of the dental pulp, tooth loss and systemic infections.

Streptococcus mutans is a gram-positive bacterium that adheres to tooth enamel by the antigen I/II (Ag I/II) and builds a network of polysaccharides which favors the adhesion and proliferation of other microorganisms.[12]

S. mutans has the ability to survive, to grow and to maintain its metabolism in acid conditions.[3] This is due to a protein called membrane-bound F-ATPase, that drives protons out of the cells, preventing the decrease of intracellular pH.[13] This characteristic makes S. mutans very cariogenic and it is for this reason that specific treatments are reqired.

Lactobacillus acidophilus is not able to adhere directly to the tooth enamel. Together with S. mutans it is the leading producer of lactic acid responsible for the demineralization of tooth enamel.[8]

Another important risk factor for dental caries is the infection by Streptococcus sobrinus. In fact, a co-infection of S. sobrinum and S. mutans causes an increased incidence of the disease.[14]

In recent years, in the oral cavity, Bifidobacterium dentium has also been isolated, the only pathogenic bacterium of the group of Bifidobacteria (gastrointestinal microorganisms).[10]

Bifidobacterium dentium infection can be acquired from probiotic food and is responsible for 8% of all caries. It survives in the environment of the mouth and interacts with the bacterial microflora.[10]

Dental caries is a multifactorial pathology. For this reason have been adopted a number of strategies in the prevention of the disease, that include:

  1. Administration of topical and systemic fluoride, which acts both on the surface of the teeth and bacterial flora, making a primary prevention;

  2. Good oral hygiene that includes use of fluoride toothpaste, flossing and specific mouthwash. The mechanical removal of plaque deposits associated with the pharmacological actions of a toothpaste, decreases the bacterial load and facilitates the disintegration of the colonies;[15,16,17]

  3. Balanced diet, low in sugar;[18]

  4. Application of sealants that reduce colonization niches.[19]

In recent decades, studies have focused on the obtaining of anti-caries vaccines directed toward S. mutans. These vaccines contain antibodies against the bacteria surface receptors Ag I/II which prevent adhesion of the microorganism to the tooth enamel.[20]

Another type of vaccine has been synthesized against glucosyl transferase enzyme secreted by S. mutans. This enzyme catalyzes the synthesis of extracellular glucans from sucrose introduced with the diet, forming a matrix responsible for bacteria accumulation.[21]

A recent in vivo study in mice has used modified cholera toxin, in order to stimulate the production of antibodies. This toxin is a potent mucosal immunogen capable of amplifying the antibody response to any different antigens administered in combination. In this case, it revealed a good antibody response in the saliva after nasal administration of Ag I/II of S. mutans.[22]

The administration of vaccines consisting of glucosyl transferase associated with aluminum phosphate, resulted in a modest production of salivary antibodies and a slow recolonization of the surface of the teeth by S. mutans.[23]

An increase in the concentration of anti-S.mutans in the human saliva was also obtained after administration of oral or nasal glucosyl transferase conveyed with liposomes.[24]

Best results were obtained with the passive immunoprophylaxis of anti-Ag I/II topical application. Volunteers subjected to this treatment showed a drastic reduction in bacterial load of S. mutans for over two years.[25]

This form of passive immunization seems to have the concrete possibility of practical application, especially in patients with xerostomia, at high risk of dental caries.[26] However, some studies have demonstrated cross-reactivity between surface antigens of Streptococcus mutans and the human heart tissue.[27]

Currently, several studies have shown that the seeds of cloves (Syzygium aromaticum), the bitter fruits of cola (Garcinia Kola) and the leaves of tobacco (Nicotiana species) can be used in the composition of toothpastes, because they are able to reduce the cariogenic action of S. mutans.[28]

However, to date, there is no effective vaccine against dental caries; therefore the best treatment for this disease is the early detection and identification of pathogenic bacterial species and their elimination with specific antibiotics.

Our laboratory (LAB® s.r.l., Codigoro, Ferrara, Italy) has developed a test for absolute and relative quantification of the most common oral cariogenic bacteria (Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sobrinus, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Actinomices viscusus, Bifidobacterium dentium). The test uses specific primers and probes for the amplification of bacteria genome sequences in PCR Real Time.

The results provide a profile of the patient infection, helpful for improving the diagnosis and planning of preventive treatment to reduce the bacterial load.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This work was supported by FAR from the University of Ferrara (FC), Ferrara, Italy, and LAB® s.r.l, Ferrara, Italy.

Footnotes

Source of Support: This work was supported by FAR from the University of Ferrara (FC), Ferrara, Italy, and LAB® s.r.l, Ferrara, Italy

Conflict of Interest: None declared

REFERENCES

  • 1.Kidd EA, Giedrys-Leeper E, Simons D. Take two dentists: A tale of root caries. Dent Update. 2000;27:222–30. doi: 10.12968/denu.2000.27.5.222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Bowen WH. Do we need to be concerned about dental caries in the coming millennium? Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2002;13:126–31. doi: 10.1177/154411130201300203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Marsh PD. Dental plaque as a biofilm: The significance of pH in health and caries. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2009;30:76–8. 80, 3-7; quiz 8, 90. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Arthur RA, Cury AA, Graner RO, Rosalen PL, Vale GC, PaesLeme AF, et al. Genotypic and phenotypic analysis of S. mutans isolated from dental biofilms formed in vivo under high cariogenic conditions. Braz Dent J. 2011;22:267–74. doi: 10.1590/s0103-64402011000400001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cury JA, Rebelo MA, Del BelCury AA, Derbyshire MT, Tabchoury CP. Biochemical composition and cariogenicity of dental plaque formed in the presence of sucrose or glucose and fructose. Caries Res. 2000;34:491–7. doi: 10.1159/000016629. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.PaesLeme AF, Koo H, Bellato CM, Bedi G, Cury JA. The role of sucrose in cariogenic dental biofilm formation--new insight. J Dent Res. 2006;85:878–87. doi: 10.1177/154405910608501002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Koga T, Oho T, Shimazaki Y, Nakano Y. Immunization against dental caries. Vaccine. 2002;20:2027–44. doi: 10.1016/s0264-410x(02)00047-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Tahmourespour A, Kermanshahi RK. The effect of a probiotic strain (Lactobacillus acidophilus) on the plaque formation of oral Streptococci. Bosn J Basic Med Sci. 2011;11:37–40. doi: 10.17305/bjbms.2011.2621. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Beighton D, Gilbert SC, Clark D, Mantzourani M, Al-Haboubi M, Ali F, et al. Isolation and identification of bifidobacteriaceae from human saliva. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008;74:6457–60. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00895-08. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ventura M, Turroni F, Zomer A, Foroni E, Giubellini V, Bottacini F, et al. The Bifidobacteriumdentium Bd1 genome sequence reflects its genetic adaptation to the human oral cavity. PLoS Genet. 2009;5:1–18. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000785. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Featherstone JD. The caries balance: The basis for caries management by risk assessment. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2004;2:259–64. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Russell MW, Lehner T. Characterisation of antigens extracted from cells and culture fluids of Streptococcus mutans serotype c. Arch Oral Biol. 1978;3:7–15. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(78)90047-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Quivey RG, Kuhnert WL, Hahn K. Genetics of acid adaptation in oral streptococci. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2001;12:301–14. doi: 10.1177/10454411010120040201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Rupf S, Merte K, Eschrich K, Kneist S. Streptococcus sobrinus in children and its influence on caries activity. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2006;7:17–22. doi: 10.1007/BF03320810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Subramaniam P, Nandan N. Effect of xylitol, sodium fluoride and triclosan containing mouth rinse on Streptococcus mutans. Contemp Clin Dent. 2011;2:287–90. doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.91790. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Damle SG, Deoyani D, Bhattal H, Yadav R, Lomba A. Comparative efficacy of dentifrice containing sodium monofluorophosphate + calcium glycerophosphate and non-fluoridated dentifrice: A randomized, double-blind, prospective study. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2012;9:68–73. doi: 10.4103/1735-3327.92948. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Jabbarifar SE, Salavati S, Akhavan A, Khosravi K, Tavakoli N, Nilchian F. Effect of fluoridated dentifrices on surface microhardnessof the enamel of deciduous teeth. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2011;9:113–7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Mobley CC. Nutrition and dental caries. Dent Clin North Am. 2003;47:319–36. doi: 10.1016/s0011-8532(02)00102-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rolland SL, McCabe JF, Imazato S, Walls AW. A randomised trial comparing the antibacterial effects of dentine primers against bacteria in natural root caries. Caries Res. 2011;45:574–80. doi: 10.1159/000334623. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Hajishengallis G, Nikolova E, Russell MW. Inhibition of Streptococcus mutans adherence to saliva-coated hydroxyapatite by human secretory immunoglobulin A (S-IgA) antibodies to cell surface protein antigen I/II: Reversal by IgA1 protease cleavage. Infect Immun. 1992;60:5057–64. doi: 10.1128/iai.60.12.5057-5064.1992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Smith DJ, King WF, Rivero J, Taubman MA. Immunological and protective effects of diepitopic subunit dental caries vaccines. Infect Immun. 2005;73:2797–804. doi: 10.1128/IAI.73.5.2797-2804.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Wu HY, Russell MW. Induction of mucosal and systemic immune responses by intranasal immunization using recombinant cholera toxin B subunit as an adjuvant. Vaccine. 1998;16:286–92. doi: 10.1016/s0264-410x(97)00168-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Smith DJ, Taubman MA. Oral immunization of humans with Streptococcus sobrinus glucosyltransferase. Infect Immun. 1987;55:2562–9. doi: 10.1128/iai.55.11.2562-2569.1987. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Childers NK, Denys FR, McGee NF, Michalek SM. Ultrastructural study of liposome uptake by M cells of rat Peyer's patch: An oral vaccine system for delivery of purified antigen. RegImmunol. 1990;3:8–16. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ma JK, Lehner T. Prevention of colonization of Streptococcus mutans by topical application of monoclonal antibodies in human subjects. Arch Oral Biol. 1990;35:115S–22S. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(90)90140-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Canettieri AC, Kretchetoff FY, Koga Ito CY, Moreira D, Fujarra FJ, Unterkircher CS. Production of monoclonal antibodies against Streptococcus mutans antigens. Braz Oral Res. 2006;20:297–302. doi: 10.1590/s1806-83242006000400003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Russell MW, Wu HY. Streptococcus mutans and the problem of heart cross-reactivity. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1990;1:191–205. doi: 10.1177/10454411900010030301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Uju DE, Obioma NP. Anticariogenic potentials of clove, tobacco and bitter kola. Asian Pac J Trop Med. 2011;4:814–8. doi: 10.1016/S1995-7645(11)60200-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Dental Research Journal are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications

RESOURCES