Frequency of remnants of sealants left behind in pits and fissures of occlusal surfaces after 2 and 3 years

Abstract

ObjectivesThe null-hypothesis tested was that there was no difference in the frequency of remnants of high-viscosity glass-ionomer sealants left behind in pits and fissures of occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars and that of resin composite and glass-carbomer sealants.Materials and methodsBased on the results of a sealant trial, a sample of sealed teeth from which the material had apparently completely disappeared from at least one of the three sections into which the occlusal surface was divided, assessed through visible clinical examination, was also assessed from images of colour photographs and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) as the reference image. The sample size consisted of 112 and 120 teeth from 59 and 98 children at evaluation years 2 and 3 respectively. Two examiners performed the assessments. Fisher’s Exact Test was applied to test for the differences between the dependent variable and the sealant groups.ResultsThe remnants of sealant material left in the deeper parts of pits and fissures were assessed from colour photograph and SEM images in five sections at year 2 and in eight sections at year 3. The assessment found no sealant group effect.ConclusionThe frequency of remnants of glass-ionomer sealant in pits and fissures of occlusal surfaces in first permanent molars is not higher than the frequency of glass-carbomer and resin sealants after 2 and 3 years.Clinical relevanceContrary to the current assumption, there appears to be no significant difference in the frequency of remnants left behind in pits and fissures between glass-ionomer and resin sealants.

Effectiveness of Seven Types of Sealants: Retention after One Year

“…22 On the other hand, another study concluded that the frequency of Glass Carbomer sealant remnants in pits and fissure is not lower than those of glass ionomer or resin sealants. 23 The reason for this disagreement may be due to the difference in the observation period. In our study, the overall observation period was 12 months, while in their study, the observation period extended for 3 years.…”

Are glass carbomer sealants more efficient in preventing carious lesions in children’s permanent molars when compared to other sealant materials? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

“…From these, six papers were excluded due to different reasons: in vitro studies, 24,25 non-randomized trial, 26 cost-effectivity study 27,28 prevention of carious lesions in permanent molars with micro-cavities in dentin. 29 One project of clinical trials, registered at the Dutch Trial Registration Centre (# 1441), resulted in 6 different papers [19][20][21][22]30,31 that showed data from distinct follow-up periods and outcomes. They were combined to describe the study characteristics, the risk of bias and the data to be included in the meta-analysis to avoid data overlap.…”

“…15 The manufacturer states that the incorporation of nanosized filler particles can improve compressive strength and wear resistance. 16,17 When this product was tested as a pit and fissure sealant controversial results have been reported [18][19][20][21][22] in comparison to resin-based and/or glass ionomer cement.…”

Restorative materials in pediatric dentistry and the place of glass carbomer

“…Hu ve ark. 41 yaptıkları çalışmada yüksek viskoziteli CİS, cam karbomer ve rezin esaslı fissür örtücülerin 2 ve 3 yıl sonraki retansiyon durumlarını değerlendirmiş, retansiyon kaybı olan dişlerdeki fissür örtücü kalıntılarını SEM ile incelemiştir. Klinik olarak incelendiğinde, retansiyon kaybı olan dişlerde, fissür örtücü kalıntıları arasında farklılık gözlenmezken, SEM incelemesinde de 2 ve 3 yıl sonrası gözlemde CİS fissür örtücü kalıntılarının cam karbomer ve rezin esaslı fissür örtücü kalıntılarından fazla olmadığı gözlenmiştir.…”