Pit and Fissure Sealants with Different Materials: Resin Based xGlass Ionomer Cement –Results after Six Months

Abstract

Objective: To compare the retention and superficial characteristics between a new resin-modified glass ionomer sealant and resin sealant. In addition, the teeth sealed were compared to partially erupted first molars (control group) without sealing in relation to the incidence of dental caries. Material and Methods: Initially, 31 children aged 6-8 years participated in this study. The study children showed caries history, but had at least two healthy first molars. A total of 114 teeth were randomly divided into three groups: Clinpro (n=36), Fluroshield (n=38), and control (n=40). The two sealants were applied under relative isolation after previous prophylaxis and enamel etching with phosphoric acid 35% (15s). Clinical evaluation was performed by two calibrated examiners. They evaluated the retention and surface characteristics of the occlusal surface. Results: Fluroshield® showed significantly greater retention than ClinproTM Varnish® XT (p=0.002). However, the performance analysis of the success and failure of retention presented no significant difference between the materials (p=0.141). Concerning to the surface characteristics, Fluroshield performed better than Clinpro after analyzing the marginal deterioration, marginal discoloration, and superficial discoloration (p<0.05). The surface texture of the materials under study was similar (p=0.071). Sealed groups (Clinpro=Fluroshield) showed similar performance in the prevention of dental caries, which was significantly lower than that of control group (p=0.001). Conclusion: Both sealants, Fluroshield® and Clinpro TM Varnish® XT were effective in preventing caries lesion within 6 months, although Fluroshield sealant showed better clinical retention.

Clinpro ™ XT Sealant Adhesion to the Occlusal Surface of Primary Molars: Longitudinal Evaluation

“…The present study showed that the ionomer sealant Clinpro TM XT is the only material that has kept the adhesion over 6 months. In a clinical test conducted by Gonçalves et al 30 with sealing of permanent molars, comparing the Clinpro TM XT and the resinous Fluroshield sealant, it was observed greater visual retention on teeth sealed with Fluroshield. However, the clinical characteristics of surface roughness, staining and marginal integrity were similar for both materials, as well as the protection capacity of the development of caries.…”

“…However, the clinical characteristics of surface roughness, staining and marginal integrity were similar for both materials, as well as the protection capacity of the development of caries. It has been suggested as an explanation of the clinical success of Clinpro TM XT the presence of resin components that would increase their retention rate and the physical and mechanical properties of the material 30 . Cabral et al 32 , in clinical study using the Clinpro TM XT and the CIV Fuji IX as sealants in permanent molars, observed lower visual retention after 24 months in teeth sealed with Clinpro TM XT, despite the similar efficacy between the materials regarding the prevention of dental caries.…”

“…The studies found until the moment relating t Clinpro TM XT Varnish to the function of sealant of pits and fissures present good laboratory and clinical trials results in permanent teeth [27][28][29][30][31][32] , justifying the cost of laboratory tests and clinical trials using the Clinpro TM XT Varnish as a sealant of pits and fissures of deciduous teeth. The objective of this study was to evaluate the bond resistance through micro tensile strength test of this new ionomer sealant used as sealants of pits and fissures in the occlusal surface of deciduous molars, compared with materials already described in the literature.…”

Performance of Preventive Methods Applied to the Occlusal Surface of Primary Teeth: A Randomized Clinical Study

“…They concluded that glass ionomer cement could be used as a temporary material at the time of eruption or when patients are at high risk of dental caries. After a six-month evaluation following the sealing of permanent teeth, the resin sealant Fluorshield ® showed better retention rates in comparison to resin-modified glass ionomer cement Vitremer ® , but pointed out that both materials were effective at preventing tooth decay [26].…”

“…In the present study, the group that received glass ionomer cement exhibited one more carious lesion in comparison to the group that received the resin sealant. The loss of material may predispose occlusal fissures to demineralization cycles and consequent appearance of new carious lesions, which could be prevented by sealant reapplication where necessary [8,25,26].…”