One-year Clinical Evaluation of Retention Ability and Anticaries Effect of a Glass Ionomer-based and a Resin-based Fissure Sealant on Permanent First Molars: An In Vivo Study

Abstract

Aim:To evaluate and compare the retention ability, anticaries effect and marginal discoloration when sealed with a glass ionomer-based sealant (Fusion i-seal) and a resin-based fissure sealant (Helioseal-F) on permanent first molars. Materials and methods: Caries free, fully erupted permanent first molars of 50 children between 6 years and 8 years were sealed with pit and fissure sealants under rubber dam isolation. Glass ionomer-based sealant was applied on a permanent first molar and the contralateral molar with resin-based sealant. The sealants were evaluated at regular intervals for a period of 1 year. Statistical analysis was done by Chi-square test. Results: Higher retention rates were noted for resin-based sealant (88%) compared to glass ionomer-based sealant (78%). None of the teeth sealed with resin sealant developed caries whereas 2% of teeth sealed with glass ionomer sealant developed caries. Marginal discoloration was not noted in teeth sealed with glass ionomer sealant whereas slight marginal discoloration was noted for 6% of teeth sealed with resin sealant. Conclusion: Clinically a difference was noted in the retention rate, anticaries effect and marginal discoloration whereas statistically no significant difference was noted for the two sealants after 1 year. Clinical significance: Pit and fissure sealants are highly effective and economical in preventing occlusal caries in young permanent tooth with low failure rate. 554compared with the retention and anticaries properties of a resinbased fissure sealant (Helioseal-F).

Nonrestorative Caries Treatment: A Systematic Review Update

“…Results of RCTs retrieved for this study confirmed previous findings regarding the caries-preventive efficacy of pit and fissure sealants but found no differences in favour of type of sealant material, namely resin- or glass ionomer–based. 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 …”

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

“…A wide variety of materials are used as fissure sealants. However, they can be classified into two primary groups—RS and GS [ 11 ]. Although RSs are commonly preferred and used due to their gratifying retention rates, their placement is technically sensitive because of the hydrophobic Bis-GMA.…”

“…No marginal discoloration was recorded on teeth sealed with glass-ionomer fissure sealants; however, minor (6%) marginal discoloration was noted for teeth sealed with a resin fissure sealant. At the same time, 2% of the teeth sealed with glass ionomer-based sealant improved caries while none of the teeth with resin-based sealant improved caries in the one-year clinical study [ 11 ]. However, there was no statistically significant difference between RS and GS in terms of retention rate, anticaries effect, and marginal discoloration in the study.…”

Recent Advances in Direct Adhesive Restoration Resin-Based Dental Materials With Remineralizing Agents

“…The representative sealant of this type is Teethmate-F (Kuraray), which shows relatively stable, long-term, low-level fluorine release. In a 1-year clinical trial performed by Mathew et al (93), the preservation rate of Helioseal-F (Vivadent) was 88%, and no secondary caries occurred. Another study showed that traditional fluoride sealants release very low concentrations of fluoride, which are insufficient for realizing antibacterial properties (94).…”