Background: The microbiome on dental composites has not been studied in detail before. It has not been conclusively clarified whether restorative materials influence the oral microbiome.

Methods: We used Illumina Miseq next-generation sequencing of the 16S V1-V2 region to compare the colonisation patterns of bovine enamel (BE) and the composite materials Grandio Flow (GF) and Grandio Blocs (GB) after 48 h in vivo in 14 volunteers. Applying a new method to maintain the oral microbiome ex vivo for 48 h also, we compared the microbiome on GF alone and with the new antimicrobial substance carolacton (GF+C).

Results: All in vitro biofilm communities showed a higher diversity and richness than those grown in vivo but the very different atmospheric conditions must be considered. Contrary to expectations, there were only a few significant differences between BE and the composite materials GB and GF either in vivo or in vitro: Oribacterium, Peptostreptococcaceae [XI][G-1] and Streptococcus mutans were more prevalent and Megasphaera, Prevotella oulorum, Veillonella atypica, V. parvula, Gemella morbillorum, and Fusobacterium periodonticum were less prevalent on BE than on composites. In vivo, such preferences were only significant for Granulicatella adiacens (more prevalent on BE) and Fusobacterium nucleatum subsp. animalis (more prevalent on composites). On DNA sequence level, there were no significant differences between the biofilm communities on GF and GF+C.

Conclusion: We found that the oral microbiome showed an increased richness when grown on various composites compared to BE in vitro, but otherwise changed only slightly independent of the in vivo or in vitro condition. Our new ex vivo biofilm model might be useful for pre-clinical testing of preventive strategies.

背景：牙科复合材料上的微生物组以前尚未进行过详细研究。尚未最终确定修复材料是否会影响口腔微生物组。

方法：我们使用16S V1-V2区域的Illumina公司Miseq下一代测序来比较牛牙釉质的定植图案（BE）和复合材料Grandio流量（GF）和Grandio集团（GB）48小时后在体内在14志愿者。我们还采用了一种新方法来维持口腔微生物组离体48小时，我们比较了单独使用GF的微生物组和使用新的抗微生物物质卡洛内酮（GF + C）的情况。

结果：所有体外生物膜群落均比体内生长的生物群落具有更高的多样性和丰富性，但必须考虑非常不同的大气条件。与预期相反，无论是在体内还是体外，BE与复合材料GB和GF之间只有很少的显着差异：Oribacterium，Peptostreptococcaceae [XI] [G-1]和变形链球菌更为普遍，而Megasphaera，Oprevotella oulorum，韦荣球菌atypica，五球菌，Gemella酒店morbillorum和梭杆菌periodonticum是上比复合普遍较少。体内，这样的偏好仅对Granulicatella adiacens（在BE中更为普遍）和Fusobacterium nucleatum亚种有重要意义。动物性动物（在复合材料中更为普遍）。在DNA序列水平上，GF和GF + C上的生物膜群落之间没有显着差异。

结论：我们发现，与体外BE相比，在各种复合材料上生长时，口腔微生物组的富集性增加，但在其他方面仅略微改变，与体内或体外条件无关。我们新的体外生物膜模型可能对预防策略的临床前测试有用。