ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2016
Detection of signature volatiles for cariogenic microorganisms.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bacterial Volatile Organic Compounds as Potential Caries and Periodontitis Disease Biomarkers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- A State of Art Review: Volatile Organic Compounds and Periodontitis.Galen medical journal · 2024Review
- Characterization of the salivary microbiome before and after antibiotic therapy via separation technique.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Fusaricidins, Polymyxins and Volatiles Produced byPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Identifying volatile in vitro biomarkers for oral bacteria with proton-transfer-reaction mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Unravelling the Potential of Salivary Volatile Metabolites in Oral Diseases. A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Volatilomes of Bacterial Infections in Humans.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Review
- mVOC 2.0: a database of microbial volatiles.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of a breath test by the identification of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by cariogenic bacteria is a promising approach for caries risk assessment and early caries detection. The aim of the present study was to investigate the volatile profiles of three major cariogenic bacteria and to assess whether the obtained signatures were species-specific. Therefore, the headspaces above cultures of Streptococcus mutans, Lactobacillus salivarius and Propionibacterium acidifaciens were analysed after 24 and 48 h of cultivation using gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. A volatile database was queried for the obtained VOC profiles. Sixty-four compounds were detected within the analysed culture headspaces and were absent (36) or at least only present in minor amounts (28) in the control headspace. For S. mutans 18, for L. salivarius three and for P. acidifaciens five compounds were found to be unique signature VOCs. Database matching revealed that the identified signatures of all bacteria were unique. Furthermore, 13 of the 64 detected substances have not been previously reported to be emitted by bacteria or fungi. Specific VOC signatures were found in all the investigated bacteria cultures. The obtained results encourage further research to investigate the transferability to in vivo conditions towards the development of a breath test.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.