ArticleCaries research2024
The Effect of Enzymatic Treatment with Mutanase, Beta-Glucanase, and DNase on a Saliva-Derived Biofilm Model.
Article in Caries research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Zerumbone Combined with Hydrolytic Enzymes: A Promising Strategy to Control Mixed Biofilms ofACS omega · 2026Article
- Probiotics, Prebiotics, Synbiotics, Postbiotics, and Bioactive Agents in Modulating Harmful Oral Biofilms.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- The effect of probiotic bacteria on community composition, microscale pH and matrix architecture in a saliva-derived model of oral biofilm.Journal of oral microbiology · 2026Article
- Exfoliating effect of β-glycyrrhetinic acid on plaque inducing gingivitis: Comparison with cetylpyridinium chloride.PloS one · 2026Article
- The effect of multiple-enzyme treatment onBiofilm · 2025Article
- Evaluating microbial regulation as a preventive strategy for radiation-related caries: A review.Head & face medicine · 2025Review
- Polymicrobial Biofilms: Interkingdom Interactions, Resistance and Therapeutic Strategies.Microbial biotechnology · 2025Review
- Dental biofilms contain DNase I-resistant Z-DNA and G-quadruplexes but alternative DNase overcomes this resistance.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Article
- Statistical and neural network modeling of β-glucanase production by Streptomyces albogriseolus (PQ002238), and immobilization on chitosan-coated magnetic microparticles.Bioresources and bioprocessing · 2025Article
- Dextranase enhances nanoparticle penetration ofJournal of oral microbiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Effect of mutanase and dextranase on biofilms of cariogenic bacteria: A systematic review ofBiofilm · 2024Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe dental biofilm matrix is an important determinant of virulence for caries development and comprises a variety of extracellular polymeric substances that contribute to biofilm stability. Enzymes that break down matrix components may be a promising approach to caries control, and in light of the compositional complexity of the dental biofilm matrix, treatment with multiple enzymes may enhance the reduction of biofilm formation compared to single enzyme therapy. The present study investigated the effect of the three matrix-degrading enzymes mutanase, beta-glucanase, and DNase, applied separately or in combinations, on biofilm prevention and removal in a saliva-derived in vitro-grown model.
methodsBiofilms were treated during growth to assess biofilm prevention or after 24 h of growth to assess biofilm removal by the enzymes. Biofilms were quantified by crystal violet staining and impedance-based real-time cell analysis, and the biofilm structure was visualized by confocal microscopy and staining of extracellular DNA (eDNA) and polysaccharides.
resultsThe in vitro model was dominated by Streptococcus spp., as determined by 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. All tested enzymes and combinations had a significant effect on biofilm prevention, with reductions of >90% for mutanase and all combinations including mutanase. Combined application of DNase and beta-glucanase resulted in an additive effect (81.0% ± 1.3% SD vs. 36.9% ± 21.9% SD and 48.2% ± 14.9% SD). For biofilm removal, significant reductions of up to 73.2% ± 5.5% SD were achieved for combinations including mutanase, whereas treatment with DNase had no effect. Glucans, but not eDNA decreased in abundance upon treatment with all three enzymes.
conclusionMulti-enzyme treatment is a promising approach to dental biofilm control that needs to be validated in more diverse biofilms.
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.