Gene expression of bacterial collagenolytic proteases in root caries

Objective: It is unknown whether bacteria play a role in the collagen matrix degradation that occurs during caries progression. Our aim was to characterize the expression level of genes involved in bacterial collagenolytic proteases in root biofilms with and without caries. Method: we collected samples from active cavitated root caries lesions (RC, n = 30) and from sound root surfaces (SRS, n = 10). Total microbial RNA was isolated and cDNA sequenced on the Illumina Hi-Seq2500. Reads were mapped to 162 oral bacterial reference genomes. Genes encoding putative bacterial collagenolytic proteases were identified. Normalization and differential expression analysis was performed on all metatranscriptomes (FDR8) but none in SRS were Pseudoramibacter alactolyticus [HMPREF0721_RS02020; HMPREF0721_RS04640], Scardovia inopinata [SCIP_RS02440] and Olsenella uli DSM7084 [OLSU_RS02990]. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the U32 proteases may be related to carious dentine. The contribution of a small number of species to dentine degradation should be further investigated. These proteases may have potential in future biotechnological and medical applications, serving as targets for the development of therapeutic agents

Efficacy and acceptance of a high-velocity microdroplet device for interdental cleaning in gingivitis patientsA monitored, randomized controlled trial

ObjectivesTo compare in a randomized clinical trial the efficacy of a high-velocity microdroplet device for interdental cleaning vs dental floss at reducing plaque and gingivitis. MethodsSixty participants with an irregular interdental home cleaning regime were randomly assigned to use either a microdroplet device (n=40, test) or dental floss (n=20, control) for 4weeks. At baseline and reassessment, the papilla bleeding index, the modified proximal plaque index and the amount of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) were recorded. At the second appointment, participants completed a questionnaire regarding their assigned interdental cleaning option. The process quality of this investigator-initiated trial was ensured by independent scientific observers and media representatives. ResultsImprovement in the interdental cleaning routine reduced gingivitis in both groups (P<.05). The microdroplet device was more effective at reducing plaque (P=.003). The GCF amount remained the same in both groups. Comfort of use was greater with the microdroplet device. However, self-reported effectiveness was superior with dental floss. About 85% of participants using the microdroplet device said they would continue daily use. ConclusionImproving the interdental cleaning routine with the microdroplet device or dental floss reduced gingivitis and plaque in both groups. Acceptance regarding comfort of use was higher with the microdroplet device. Dental floss remained the first choice for narrow interdental spaces, yet the microdroplet device offers an effective and well-accepted alternative for patients who fail the proper flossing routine