CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsDental materials and restorations

Microbial species associated with dental caries found in saliva and in situ after use of self-ligating and conventional brackets

Open access
BERGAMO, Ana Zilda Nazar, MATSUMOTO, Mirian Aiko Nakane, NASCIMENTO, Cássio do, ANDRUCIOLI, Marcela Cristina Damião, ROMANO, Fábio Lourenço, SILVA, Raquel Assed Bezerra, SILVA, Léa Assed Bezerra, NELSON-FILHO, Paulo·2019·Journal of Applied Oral Science
DOI 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0426PMC PMC6459231
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Enamel demineralization is among the main topics of interest in the orthodontic field. Self-ligating brackets have been regarded as advantageous in this aspect. The aim of this study was to evaluate the break homeostasis in the oral environment and the levels of microorganisms associated with dental caries among the different types of brackets. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty patients received two self-ligating brackets: In-Ovation®R, SmartClipTM, and one conventional GeminiTM. Saliva was collected before bonding (S0), 30 (S1) and 60 (S2) days after bonding. One sample of each bracket was removed at 30 and 60 days for the in situ analysis. Checkerboard DNA-DNA Hybridization was employed to evaluate the levels of microbial species as-sociated with dental caries. Data were evaluated by nonparametric Friedman and Wilcoxon tests at 5% significance level. RESULTS: The salivary levels of L. casei (p=0.033), S. sobrinus (p=0.011), and S. sanguinis (p=0.004) increased in S1. The in situ analyses showed alteration in S. mutans (p=0.047), whose highest levels were observed to the In-Ovation®R. CONCLUSIONS: The orthodontic appliances break the salivary homeostasis of microorganisms involved in dental caries. The contamination pattern was different between self-ligating and conventional brackets. The In-Ovation®R presented worse performance considering the levels of cariogenic bacterial species.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0426

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Two included studies showed that self-ligating brackets are associated with increased colonisation by potentially pathogenic microorganisms compared with conventional brackets.

    “Two studies showed SLBs are associated with increased colonisation by potentially pathogenic microorganisms compared to CBs.”

    From Microbial colonisation associated with conventional and self-ligating brackets: a systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as Bergamo et al., 2019

    The Results and Conclusion (pages unavailable) report the highest S. mutans levels on one self-ligating bracket, In-Ovation R, among the three bracket types tested. That supports a comparison for this bracket and species, but not a general finding that self-ligating brackets had increased pathogenic colonisation: differences for S. sobrinus and L. casei were not statistically significant. This paper reports one study; it cannot establish what the other included study found. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In Bergamo et al. 2019, In-Ovation-R self-ligating brackets had the highest levels of colonisation by S. mutans at 60 days into treatment.

    “In the study by Bergamo et al. (2019), In-Ovation-R SLBs had the highest levels of colonisation by S. mutans at 60 days into treatment.”

    From Microbial colonisation associated with conventional and self-ligating brackets: a systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as Bergamo et al., 2019

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. [1]Baka ZM Basciftci FA Arslan U Effects of 2 bracket and ligation types on plaque retention: a quantitative microbiologic analysis with real-time polymerase chain reaction Am. J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013 144 2 260 267 23910207
  2. [2]Jung WS Kim H Park SY Cho EJ Ahn SJ Quantitative analysis of changes in salivary mutans streptococci after orthodontic treatment Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014 145 5 603 609 24785924
  3. [3]Iwano Y Sugano N Matsumoto K Nishihara R Iizuka T Yoshinuma N et al Salivary microbial levels in relation to periodontal status and caries development J. Periodontol. Res 2010 45 2 165 169 20470257
  4. [4]Takahashi N Nyvad B The role of bacteria in the caries process: ecological perspectives J Dent Res 2011 90 3 294 303 20924061
  5. [5]Sanpei S Endo T Shimooka S Caries risk factors in children under treatment with sectional brackets Angle Orthod 2010 80 3 509 514 20050745 PMC8985719
  6. [6]Seki M Yamashita Y Shibata Y Torigoe H Tsuda H Maeno M Effect of mixed mutans streptococci colonization on caries development Oral Microbiol Immunol 2006 21 1 47 52 16390341
  7. [7]Saravia ME Nelson P Filho Ito IY Silva LA Silva RA Emilson CG Morphological differentiation between S. mutans and S. sobrinus on modified SB-20 culture medium Microbiol Res 2011 166 1 63 67 20092983
  8. [8]Ghasempour M Rajabnia R Irannejad A Hamzeh M Ferdosi E Bagheri M Frequency, biofilm formation and acid susceptibility of Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sobrinus in saliva of preschool children with different levels of caries activity Dent Res J 2013 10 4 440 445 PMC3793405 24130577
  9. [9]Becker MR Paster BJ Leys EJ Moeschberger ML Kenyon SG Galvin JL et al Molecular analysis of bacterial species associated with childhood caries J Clin Microbiol 2002 40 3 1001 1009 11880430 PMC120252
  10. [10]Munson MA Banerjee A Watson TF Wade WG Molecular analysis of the mi-croflora associated with dental caries J Clin Microbiol 2004 42 7 3023 3029 15243054 PMC446285
  11. [11]Kreth J Merritt J Shi W Qi F Competition and coexistence between Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sanguinis in the dental biofilm J Bacteriol 2005 187 21 7193 7203 16237003 PMC1272965
  12. [12]Metwalli KH Khan S Krom BP Jabra-Rizk MA Streptococcus mutans, Candida albicans, and the human mouth: a sticky situation PLoS Pathog 2013 9 10 e1003616 24146611 PMC3798555
  13. [13]Falsetta ML Klein MI Colonne PM Scott-Anne K Gregoire S Pai CH et al Symbiotic relationship between Streptococcus mutans and Candida albicans synergizes the virulence of plaque-biofilms in vivo Infect Immun 2014 82 5 1968 1981 24566629 PMC3993459
  14. [14]Harradine NM Self-ligating brackets: where are we now? J Orthod 2003 30 3 262 273 14530427
  15. [15]Fleming PS Johal A Self-ligating brackets in orthodontics. A systematic review Angle Orthod 2010 80 3 575 584 20050755 PMC8985730
  16. [17]Van Gastel J Quirynen M Teughels W Coucke W Carels C Influence of bracket design on microbial and periodontal parameters in vivo J Clin Periodontol 2007 34 5 423 431 17448045
  17. [18]Pellegrini P Sauerwein R Finlayson T McLeod J Covell DA Jr Maier T Machida CA Plaque retention by self-ligating vs elastomeric orthodontic brackets: quantitative comparison of oral bacteria and detection with adenosine tri-phosphate-driven bioluminescence Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009 135 4 426 e1-9 19361723
  18. [19]Mummolo S Marchetti E Giuca MR Gallusi G Tecco S Gatto R et al In-office bacteria test for a microbial monitoring during the conventional and self-ligating orthodontic treatment Head Face Med 2013 9 1 7 PMC3563582 23375053
  19. [20]Nascimento LE Pithon MM Santos RL Freitas AO Alviano DS Nojima LI et al Colonization of Streptococcus mutans on esthetic brackets: self-ligating vs conventional Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013 143 4 Suppl S72 S77 23540639
  20. [21]Pejda S Varga ML Milosevic SA Mestrovic S Slaj M Repic D et al Clinical and microbiological parameters in patients with self-ligating and conventional brackets during early phase of orthodontic treatment Angle Orthod 2013 83 1 133 139 22765511 PMC8805529
  21. [22]Nascimento LE Souza MM Azevedo AR Maia LC Are self-ligating brackets related to less formation of Streptococcus mutans colonies? A systematic revi-ew Dental Press J Orthod 2014 19 1 60 68 24713561 PMC4299422
  22. [24]Bergamo AZ Nelson P Filho Andrucioli MC Nascimento C Pedrazzi V Matsumoto MA Microbial complexes levels in conventional and self-ligating brackets Clin Oral Investig 2017 21 1037 1046 27270902
  23. [25]Bergamo AZ Nelson P Filho Nascimento C Casarin RC Casati MZ Andrucioli MC et al Cytokine profile changes in gingival crevicular fluid after placement different brackets types Arch Oral Biol 2018 85 79 83 29032048
  24. [26]Peros K Mestrovic S Anic-Milosevic S Slaj M Salivary microbial and nonmicrobial parameters in children with fixed orthodontic appliances Angle Orthod 2011 81 51 901 906 21534725 PMC8916182
  25. [27]Ahn SJ Kho HS Lee SW Nahm DS Roles of salivary proteins in the adherence of oral streptococci to various orthodontic brackets J Dental Res 2002 81 6 411 415 12097434
  26. [28]Slots J Slots H Bacterial and viral pathogens in saliva: disease relationship and infectious risk Periodontol 2000 2011 55 1 48 69 21134228 PMC7159101
  27. [29]Khalaf K Factors affecting the formation, severity and location of white spot lesions during orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances J Oral Maxillofac Res 2014 5 e4 PMC4007370 24800054
  28. [30]Papaioannou W Gizani S Haffajee AD Quirynen M Mamai-Homata E Papagiannoulis L The microbiota on different oral surfaces in healthy children Oral Microbiol Immunol 2009 24 3 183 189 19416446
  29. [31]Saygun I Nizam N Keskiner I Bal V Kubar A Açikel C et al Salivary infectious agents and periodontal disease status J Periodontal Res 2011 46 2 235 239 21261620
  30. [32]Wade WG The oral microbiome in health and disease Pharmacol Res 2013 69 1 137 143 23201354
  31. [33]Koga-Ito CY Unterkircher CS Watanabe H Martins CAP Vidotto V Jorge AO Caries risk tests and salivary levels of immunoglobulins to Streptococcus mutans and Candida albicans in mouthbreathing syndrome patients Caries Res 2003 37 1 38 43 12566638
  32. [34]Mummolo S Nota A Caruso S Quinzi V Marchetti E Marzo G Salivary markers and microbial flora in mouth breathing late adolescents Biomed Res Int 2018 2018 8687608 29693018 PMC5859862

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
BERGAMO, A. Z. N., MATSUMOTO, M. A. N., NASCIMENTO, C. D., ANDRUCIOLI, M. C. D., ROMANO, F. L., SILVA, R. A. B., SILVA, L. A. B., & NELSON-FILHO, P.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Applied Oral Science
Publisher
FapUNIFESP (SciELO)
Published
2019
Volume
27
Pages
e20180426-e20180426
ISSN
  • 1678-7757 (ISSN-L)
  • 1678-7765
DOI
10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0426
PMC
PMC6459231
OpenAlex
W2939617164
Cited by
13
References
2
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2
FWCI
2.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Oral Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (10/16757-5)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Dental materials and restorations
Keywords
dental caries, self-ligating brackets, conventional brackets, cariogenic bacteria, Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sobrinus, Streptococcus sanguinis, Lactobacillus casei, enamel demineralization, orthodontic appliances, Gemini
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Dental Bonding, Child, Dental Caries, Female, Homeostasis, Humans, Male, Saliva, Time Factors, DNA Probes, Orthodontic Appliance Design, Orthodontic Brackets, Statistics, Nonparametric

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review