Viability quantitative PCR (v-qPCR) has evolved into a valuable, mainstream technique for determining the number of viable microorganisms in samples by qPCR. Amplicon length is known to be positively correlated with the ability to distinguish between live and dead bacteria but is negatively correlated with qPCR efficiency.

Several oral diseases are characterized by a shift within the oral microbiome towards a pathogenic, dysbiotic composition. Broad-spectrum antimicrobials are often part of patient care. However, because of the rising antibiotic resistance, alternatives are increasingly desirable. Alternatively, supplying beneficial species through probiotics is increasingly showing favorable results. Unfortunately, these probiotics are rarely evaluated comparatively. In this study, the in vitro effects of three known and three novel Lactobacillus strains, together with four novel Streptococcus salivarius strains were comparatively evaluated for antagonistic effects on proximal agar growth, antimicrobial properties of probiotic supernatant and the probiotic’s effects on in vitro periodontal biofilms. Strain-specific effects were observed as differences in efficacy between genera and differences within genera. While some of the Lactobacillus candidates were able to reduce the periodontal pathobiont A. actinomycetemcomitans, the S. salivarius strains were not. However, the S. salivarius strains were more effective against periodontal pathobionts P. intermedia, P. gingivalis, and F. nucleatum. Vexingly, most of the Lactobacillus strains also negatively affected the prevalence of commensal species within the biofilms, while this was lower for S. salivarius strains. Both within lactobacilli and streptococci, some strains showed significantly more inhibition of the pathobionts, indicating the importance of proper strain selection. Additionally, some species showed reductions in non-target species, which can result in unexpected and unexplored effects on the whole microbiome.

Probiotics have demonstrated oral health benefits by influencing the microbiome and the host. Although promising, their current use is potentially constrained by several restrictions. One such limiting factor lies in the prevailing preparation of a probiotic product. To commercialize the probiotic, a shelf stable product is achieved by temporarily inactivating the live probiotic through drying or freeze drying. Even though a lyophilized probiotic can be kept dormant for an extended period of time, their viability can be severely compromised, making their designation as probiotics questionable. Additionally, does the application of an inactive probiotic directly into the oral cavity make sense? While the dormancy may allow for survival on its way towards the gut, does it affect their capacity for oral colonisation? To evaluate this, 21 probiotic product for oral health were analysed for the number of viable (probiotic), culturable (CFU) and dead (postbiotic) cells, to verify whether the commercial products indeed contain what they proclaim. After isolating and uniformly lyophilizing three common probiotic species in a simple yet effective lyoprotective medium, the adhesion to saliva covered hydroxyapatite discs of lyophilized probiotics was compared to fresh or reactivated lyophilized probiotics. Unfortunately, many of the examined products failed to contain the claimed amounts of viable cells, but also the strains used were inadequately characterized and lacked clinical evidence for that unknown strain, questioning their label of a ‘probiotic’. Additionally, lyophilized probiotics demonstrated low adhesive capacity compared to their counterparts, prompting the question of why fresh or reactivated probiotics are not currently used.

Background: Modulation of the commensal oral microbiota constitutes a promising preventive/therapeutic approach in oral healthcare. The use of prebiotics for maintaining/restoring the health-associated homeostasis of the oral microbiota has become an important research topic. Aims: This study hypothesised that in vitro 14-species oral biofilms can be modulated by (in)direct stimulation of beneficial/commensal bacteria with new potential prebiotic substrates tested at 1 M and 1%_(w/v), resulting in more host-compatible biofilms with fewer pathogens, decreased virulence and less inflammatory potential. Methods: Established biofilms were repeatedly rinsed with N-acetyl-D-glucosamine, α-D-lactose, D-(+)-trehalose or D-(+)-raffinose at 1 M or 1%_(w/v). Biofilm composition, metabolic profile, virulence and inflammatory potential were eventually determined. Results: Repeated rinsing caused a shift towards a more health-associated microbiological composition, an altered metabolic profile, often downregulated virulence gene expression and decreased the inflammatory potential on oral keratinocytes. At 1 M, the substrates had pronounced effects on all biofilm aspects, whereas at 1%_(w/v) they had a pronounced effect on virulence gene expression and a limited effect on inflammatory potential. Conclusion: Overall, this study identified four new potential prebiotic substrates that exhibit different modulatory effects at two different concentrations that cause in vitro multi-species oral biofilms to become more host-compatible.