Caries-Preventive Effect and Retention of Glass-Ionomer and Resin-Based Sealants: A Randomized Clinical Comparative Evaluation

Abstract

Background. Deep fissures are highly unprotected from the development of caries. Resin-based materials and glass-ionomer cements for sealing fissures are useful in caries control through physical barrier formation, which prohibits metabolic exchange between fissure microorganisms. Retention is one of the most critical properties of fissure sealants. This in vivo study is aimed at comparing and evaluating the clinical efficacy of resin and glass ionomer-based fissure sealants on first permanent molars with follow-ups at 6-, 12-, and 18-month intervals. Methods. A randomized split-mouth design clinical study was conducted after obtaining the ethical committee approval. A total of 50 patients, aged between 7 and 12 years, were randomized and enrolled in the study to perform a total of 200 sealant placements on all four caries-free and hypoplasia-free first permanent molars having deep fissures, which are susceptible to caries, were included in this study. The four permanent molars were divided into the following four groups: group A (control), B (Grandioseal, Voco, Germany), C (Smartseal & Loc, Detax Gmbh & Co, Germany), and D (Fuji triage capsule, GC, Belgium). The sealed molars were clinically evaluated at intervals of 6, 12, and 18 months to assess sealant retention, surface roughness, marginal coloration, and caries status through visual evaluation of the sealant by two evaluators. Results. Concerning retention, there were statistically significant differences between the sealants in terms of the survival of partial and fully retained sealants as well as in the survival of caries-free teeth. Two resin-based (Smartseal & Loc) and glass-ionomer cement (Fuji triage) sealants showed significantly similar performances in permanent molars for up to 18 months. In terms of retention, one of the resin-based (Grandioseal) sealants performed better as compared to the others and showed better caries prevention in deep fissures. Conclusion. It is concluded that both the sealants had comparable retention and caries-preventive effects in 7 to 12-year-old children and can be considered as suitable sealants for a period of at least 18 months in moderate caries risk patients.

Screening, Referral, Behavioral Counseling, and Preventive Interventions for Oral Health in Children and Adolescents Aged 5 to 17 Years

“…Across all KQs, 3 systematic reviews (total of 20 684 participants) of 54 unique trials (53 publications) and 23 additional studies (in 27 publications; total of 15 026 participants) were included (Figure 3). One study assessed diagnostic accuracy of screening; the systematic reviews and other 22 studies (19 randomized clinical trials and 3 nonrandomized trials) addressed preventive interventions.…”

“…66,72 In 1 of the trials, outcomes were very similar when sealants were administered by a dentist or a schoolteacher. Two subsequent, fair-quality trials 84,85 (n = 187 and n = 50) also reported inconsistent findings for glass ionomer sealants vs no sealants (eTables 16 and 17 in the Supplement).…”

The effect of the use of the deproteinization agent hypochlorous acid and two different pit and fissure sealant self-adhesive flowable composites upon its bonding with the enamel

“…In in vivo and in vitro studies, the contamination of the sur-face enamel with saliva was shown to be the most significant factor that affected both the retention and the clinical success of the resin-based fissure sealants [39].…”

A concise review of dental sealants in caries management

“…Table 1 shows the caries incidence of different dental sealants. With the results of the studies that have blank control groups, we summarize the preventive fractions are 92% for both resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant at a 6-month follow-up ( 52 ); 64% - 88% for resin sealant, and 88% for glass ionomer sealant at an 18-month follow-up ( 68 ); 61% for resin sealant and 35% for glass ionomer at a 60-month follow-up ( 56 ). Results of hybrid sealant were limited in the literature.…”

“…Table 1 shows the retention rates of dental sealants published in the past ten years (2012–2022). For resin sealant, the retention rate ranges from 11% to 89% at a 6-month follow-up ( 40 , 52 , 61 , 62 ); from 18 to 88% at a 12-month follow-up ( 26 , 45 , 47 , 49 – 51 , 55 , 58 – 60 , 65 , 67 ); from 24% to 70% at an 18-month follow-up ( 54 , 57 , 68 ); from 21% to 80% at a 24-month follow-up ( 44 , 46 , 48 , 63 , 64 , 66 ). Studies with longer follow-up periods were limited.…”