Elsevier

Journal of Dentistry

Volume 48, May 2016, Pages 16-25
Journal of Dentistry

Review article
Probiotics for managing caries and periodontitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2016.03.002Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives

Probiotics might be beneficial to prevent or treat caries, gingivitis or periodontitis. We aimed to appraise trials assessing probiotics for managing caries and periodontal disease.

Data

We included randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of probiotics versus (placebo) control with regards to Streptococcus mutans [SM], lactobacilli [LB], periodontal pathogens numbers, gingivitis, oral hygiene, caries incidence/experience increment, or periodontitis. Meta-analysis and trial-sequential-analysis were performed.

Sources

Three electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Central) were screened.

Study selection

50 studies (3247 participants) were included. Studies were mainly performed in children and used lactobacilli (45); bifidobacteria (12) or other genus (3). Probiotics significantly increased the chance of reducing SM (OR: 2.20, 95% CI: 1.23/3.92) or LB (OR: 2.84; 1.34/6.03) <104 CFU/ml. Such reduction was confirmed for SM counts (standardized mean differences: −1.18, 95% CI: −1.64/-0.72), but not LB (SMD: 0.33; 0.15/0.52). For periodontal pathogens, no significant difference was found. Probiotics significantly reduced bleeding-on-probing (SMD: −1.15; −1.68/-0.62) and gingival index (SMD: −0.86; −1.52/-0.20), but not plaque index (SMD: −0.34; −0.89/0.21). Caries incidence was not significantly reduced (OR: 0.60; 0.35/1.04), neither was caries experience (SMD: −0.26; −0.55/0.03) or CAL (SMD: −0.46; −0.84/0.08). In contrast, probing-pocket depths (SMD: −0.86; −1.55/-0.17) were significantly reduced. Data was quantitatively insufficient for conclusive findings, and risk of bias was high.

Conclusion

Current evidence is insufficient for recommending probiotics for managing dental caries, but supportive towards managing gingivitis or periodontitis. Future studies should only record bacterial numbers alongside accepted disease markers or indicators.

Clinical significance

Probiotic therapy could be used for managing periodontal diseases. For caries, further studies should ascertain both efficacy and safety.

Introduction

Probiotics are defined as “live microorganisms which, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host” [1]. Currently, antibacterial effects (e.g. via co-aggregation, toxic by-products or competition for substrates), stabilization of the flora and modulation of the host’s immune system are thought to provide these benefits. A range of bacteria (most of them being acidogenic like lactobacilli, streptococci or bifidobacteria) have been suggested to exert one or more of these effects [2], [3], [4].

Probiotics might be beneficial to prevent or treat oral diseases like caries, gingivitis or periodontitis, which are associated with a shift in the bacterial biofilm composition and activity as well as subsequent host reactions. Potential effects of probiotic species on cariogenic or periodontal pathogens have been abundantly demonstrated in vitro [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. Clinically, alterations of surrogate markers like bacterial numbers have been used to argue for the benefits of probiotic therapy. Only few studies, however, have used indicators of the diseases themselves (increment of newly developed caries lesions or caries experience; probing-pocket depths or clinical attachment loss) to prove the efficacy of probiotics for preventing or treating caries or periodontitis [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. Moreover, some studies even claim probiotics to not have beneficial, but potentially harmful effects [9], [16], [17].

Recent systematic reviews in the field have either qualitatively summarized selected studies on either caries [3] or periodontitis [18], or meta-analyzed available surrogate markers [19]. No study so far has attempted to comprehensively display the available evidence from randomized controlled trials on effects and efficacy of probiotics on both caries and periodontal disease using both qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Moreover, no study investigated potential causes for heterogeneity between studies, i.e. assessed the role of potential effect modifying variables. The present study aimed to systematically review and synthesize available randomized controlled studies investigating effects of probiotics on oral caries or periodontal disease (gingivitis and periodontitis). The results of this review should be useful to guide clinical decision-making and further research in the field.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

This review follows international guidelines for performing and reporting systematic reviews [20]. The study protocol was registered after the screening stage (PROSPERO CRD42015026138). We deviated from this original protocol by only assessing outcomes at the last recorded visit, not separately after the intervention and after conclusion of follow-up. This was done, as not at all studies had a follow-up period. Moreover, periodontal pathogen numbers were analysed separately for each species

Study selection

From 512 identified studies, 85 were assessed full-text. Eventually, 50 studies, were included (Fig. 1), while 35 reports were excluded. Excluded studies and reasons for exclusion can be found in Table S1.

Study characteristics

Included studies (Table S2) were published between 2001 and 2015, and used parallel group (40), cross-over (9) or split-mouth design (1). Studies were performed in children (aged <18: 20 studies) or adults (18–65 years: 30 studies). Samples sizes ranged between 18 and 524 participants (mean:

Review findings

This review investigated the effects of probiotic therapy on several outcomes associated with caries or periodontal disease. The most frequently assessed parameter was bacterial numbers. We found probiotics, most of all bifidobacteria, to significantly reduce SM numbers regardless if dichotomous or continuous variables were used. On the other hand, the numbers of LB after probiotic therapy were found to be increased when reported on a continuous scale. Such increase is not surprising given that

Acknowledgement

This study was funded by the authors’ institutions.

References (34)

  • K. Lee do et al.

    Antimicrobial activity of Bifidobacterium spp: isolated from healthy adult Koreans against cariogenic microflora

    Arch. Oral Biol.

    (2011)
  • F. Schwendicke et al.

    Cariogenic effects of probiotic lactobacillus rhamnosus GG in a dental biofilm model

    Caries Res.

    (2014)
  • L. Twetman et al.

    Coaggregation between probiotic bacteria and caries-associated strains: an in vitro study

    Acta Odontol. Scand.

    (2009)
  • J.P. Burton et al.

    Influence of the probiotic Streptococcus salivarius strain M18 on indices of dental health in children: a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

    J. Med. Microbiol.

    (2013)
  • L. Nase et al.

    Effect of long-term consumption of a probiotic bacterium, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, in milk on dental caries and caries risk in children

    Caries Res.

    (2001)
  • L.G. Petersson et al.

    Reversal of primary root caries lesions after daily intake of milk supplemented with fluoride and probiotic lactobacilli in older adults

    Acta Odontol. Scand.

    (2011)
  • C. Stecksen-Blicks et al.

    Effect of long-term consumption of milk supplemented with probiotic lactobacilli and fluoride on dental caries and general health in preschool children: a cluster-randomized study

    Caries Res.

    (2009)
  • Cited by (184)

    • Peptide based composites for biomedical application: focus on the new age of pathogen control

      2023, Green Sustainable Process for Chemical and Environmental Engineering and Science: Biomedical Applications of Green Composites
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text