Comparison and Evaluation of the Retention, Cariostatic Effect, and Discoloration of Conventional Clinpro 3M ESPE and Hydrophilic Ultraseal XT Hydro among 12–15-year-old Schoolchildren for a Period of 6 Months: A Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

Introduction Pit and fissures are more prone to caries as compared to smooth surfaces. Sealing the pit and fissures with sealants is considered to be highly effective in the prevention of pit and fissure caries. Hydrophobic sealants are technique sensitive in nature. Ultraseal XT Hydro sealant is moisture tolerant which incorporates the benefits of both hydrophilic and hydrophobic sealants into one unique chemistry. Hence, the study was conducted to compare and evaluate the retention, cariostatic effect, and discoloration of conventional Clinpro™ 3M™ ESPE™ and hydrophilic Ultraseal XT Hydro sealants among 12–15-year-old schoolchildren for 6 months. Materials and methods It was a single-blinded, randomized split-mouth clinical trial. Schoolchildren aged 12–15 years were recruited in this clinical trial. Clinpro sealant and Ultraseal XT Hydro were placed in the right and left quadrant molars, respectively, and were assigned as group I and II. The sample size arrived was 60 teeth per group and at 30 patients based on the computer-generated random sequence. Sealant coverage between the two sealants was compared using Mann–Whitney test and Z test for proportions. Results After 6 months, it was seen that 10 teeth out of 44 (22.72%) with Clinpro had the sealant covering all the fissures compared to Ultraseal XT Hydro which was only 9%. Fifty-nine percent of retention rate was seen with Clinpro compared to Ultraseal XT Hydro sealant (27.27%). Caries incidence was higher in the case of group II. No difference was observed with regard to the discoloration of the sealants. Conclusion It was concluded that for a longer follow-up period conventional Clinpro™ 3M™ ESPE™ was better than Ultra XT Hydro seal in terms of retention and cariostatic effect. How to cite this article Mohapatra S, Prabakar J, Indiran MA, et al. Comparison and Evaluation of the Retention, Cariostatic Effect, and Discoloration of Conventional Clinpro 3M ESPE and Hydrophilic Ultraseal XT Hydro among 12–15-year-old Schoolchildren for a Period of 6 Months: A Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(6):688–693.

Retention Rate of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Resin-Based Sealant under Field Conditions: A Split-Mouth Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

“…However, the different arch contribution to the retention rate of sealant is controversy. 16,17 This study conforms with a study by Ratnaditya et al that found higher retention rate of sealants on the lower arch. The higher retention found in lower arch may be from the easier access and direct visualized application of the sealant, the gravitation force; moreover, the better-defined pit and fissure anatomy of mandibular molars may also contribute to the outcomes.…”

A concise review of dental sealants in caries management

“…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.…”

A literature review on moisture resistant pit and fissure sealants

“…It is composed of irregular submicron and nano sized silicon, barium and aluminum bearing filter phases incorporated in a ductile resin matrix and this is shown to reduce micro leakage and subsequently increase enamel roughness [33]. However, in terms of retention and cariostatic effect, it was found to be lesser than hydrophobic sealant, as reported by another study [35]. It also has a potential anti-bacterial action [36].…”