The recent developments in the science underpinning our knowledge of both the initiation of dental caries and the subsequent behaviour of lesions over time gives us a solid base to understand caries differently. Advances in understanding the human and oral microbiome have come in parallel with the recognition of the importance of balancing protective and pathological risk factors. Caries prevention and management is now about controlling risk factors to maintain a balanced intraoral biofilm ecology that guards against a continuing low pH driven by the frequent consumption of sugars. Thus, caries control is no longer about attempts at eradicating any specific microorganism. Further, the present knowledge leads to the classification of dental caries as a non-communicable disease (NCD), which is vitally important from a policy perspective (both globally and at the country level). Caries shares similar risk factors with other chronic/systemic diseases, which provides opportunities for developing common prevention strategies and promoting health equity through action on the social determinants of health. So, preventing and controlling caries should be integrated across the so-called upstream, midstream and downstream levels and these activities can also help to control other NCDs.

Today, dental caries is regarded as a preventable non‐communicable disease (NCD) that affects a majority of the population across their lifespan. As such, it shares a number of behavioural, socio‐economic, and lifestyle factors with other NCDs, such as overweight and diabetes, and should be subjected to a similar model of chronic disease management. Caries prevention has traditionally relied on fluoride exposure, diet control, thorough oral hygiene, and antibacterial measures. Prevention of caries as an NCD does certainly not disqualify these methods, but brings them into a new context. This conference paper provides a brief review on how common preventive measures can interfere with the drivers of dysbiosis and promote the growth of health‐associated clusters in the oral microbiome. Besides the established routines of regular toothbrushing with fluoride products, there is an opportunity for additional technologies, based on ecological principles, to address and modify the oral biofilm. Methods to reduce dietary sugar intake, slow down plaque metabolism, and support saliva functions should be further developed and investigated in terms of efficacy, compliance, and cost‐effectiveness. Furthermore, biofilm engineering through pre‐ and probiotics early in life to support microbial diversity seem promising in order to obtain a sustained caries‐preventive effect.

In recent years, the concept of preventing caries-related microbial dysbiosis by enhancing the growth and survival of health-associated oral microbiota has emerged. In this article, the current evidence for the role of oral pre- and probiotics in caries prevention and caries management is discussed. Prebiotics are defined as “substrates that are selectively utilized by host microorganisms conferring a health benefit.” With regard to caries, this would include alkali-generating substances such as urea and arginine, which are metabolized by some oral bacteria, resulting in ammonia production and increase in pH. While there is no evidence that urea added to chewing gums or mouth rinses significantly contributes to caries inhibition, multiple studies have shown that arginine in consumer products can exert an inhibitory effect on the caries process. Probiotics are “live microorganisms which when administrated in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host.” Clinical trials have suggested that school-based programs with milk supplemented with probiotics and probiotic lozenges can reduce caries development in preschool children and in schoolchildren with high caries risk. Due to issues with research ethics (prebiotics) and risk of bias (prebiotics, probiotics), the confidence in the effect estimate is however limited. Further long-term clinical studies are needed with orally derived probiotic candidates, including the health-economic perspectives. In particular, the development and evaluation of oral synbiotic products, containing both prebiotics and a probiotic, would be of interest in the future management of dental caries.

The objectives of this study were to evaluate systematically the evidence of the caries‐preventive effect of fissure sealing of occlusal tooth surfaces and to examine factors potentially modifying the effect. The search strategies included electronic databases, reference lists of articles, and selected textbooks. Inclusion criteria were randomized or quasi‐randomized clinical trials or controlled clinical trials comparing fissure sealing with no treatment or another preventive treatment in children up to 14 years of age at the start; the outcome measure was caries increment; the diagnostic criteria had been described; and the follow‐up time was at least 2 years. Inclusion decisions were taken and grading of the studies was done independently by two of the authors. The main measure of effect was relative risk reduction. Thirteen studies using resin‐based or glass ionomer sealant materials were included in the final analysis. The results showed that most studies were performed during the 1970s and a single application had been utilized. The relative caries risk reduction pooled estimate of resin‐based sealants on permanent 1st molars was 33% (relative risk=0.67; CI=0.55-0.83). The effect depended on retention of the sealant. In conclusion, the review suggests limited evidence that fissure sealing of 1st permanent molars with resin‐based materials has a caries‐preventive effect. The evidence is incomplete for permanent 2nd molars, premolars and primary molars and for glass ionomer cements. Overall, there remains a need for further trials of high quality, particularly in child populations with a low and a high caries risk, respectively.

Background: Probiotic bacteria are suggested to play a role in the maintenance of oral health. Such health promoting bacteria are added to different commercial probiotic products. The aim of the study was to investigate the ability of a selection of lactobacilli strains, used in commercially available probiotic products, to inhibit growth of oral mutans streptococci andC. albicans in vitro.Methods: Eight probiotic lactobacilli strains were tested for growth inhibition on three reference strains and two clinical isolates of mutans streptococci as well as two reference strains and three clinical isolates ofCandida albicanswith an agar overlay method.Results: At concentrations ranging from 10⁹to 10⁵CFU/ml, all lactobacilli strains inhibited the growth of the mutans streptococci completely with the exception ofL. acidophilusLa5 that executed only a slight inhibition of some strains at concentrations corresponding to 10⁷and 10⁵CFU/ml. At the lowest cell concentration (10³CFU/ml), onlyL. plantarum299v andL. plantarum931 displayed a total growth inhibition while a slight inhibition was seen for all five mutans streptococci strains byL. rhamnosusLB21,L. paracaseiF19,L. reuteriPTA 5289 andL. reuteriATCC 55730. All the tested lactobacilli strains reduced candida growth but the effect was generally weaker than for mutans streptococci. The twoL. plantarumstrains andL. reuteriATCC 55730 displayed the strongest inhibition onCandida albicans. No significant differences were observed between the reference strains and the clinical isolates.Conclusion: The selected probiotic strains showed a significant but somewhat varying ability to inhibit growth of oral mutans streptococci andCandida albicans in vitro.