Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Apr;17(3):711-6. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0740-2. Epub 2012 May 3.

Efficacy of a moisture-tolerant material for fissure sealing: a prospective randomised clinical trial.

Author information

1
Department of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Dental Clinic of the Justus Liebig University, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392, Giessen, Germany. nadine.schlueter@dentist.med.uni-giessen.de

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

Fissure sealings offer nearly complete protection against fissure caries, provided that they are adequately applied, for composite-based sealants with sufficient moisture control. This is not always attainable, particularly in children with low compliance. To counter this problem, a moisture-tolerant sealant has been developed. The present randomised clinical trial compared such a moisture-tolerant material (Embrace) with a conventional sealant (Helioseal).

MATERIAL AND METHODS:

In 55 participants (mean age, 10 ± 3 years), corresponding molar pairs were sealed with either Embrace or Helioseal. Retention, quality of sealing, and caries were clinically examined, both tactilely and visually, immediately and after 1 year.

RESULTS:

After 1 year, 93% of Helioseal sealings were complete, whereas 60% of Embrace sealings showed partial and 13% complete loss. The surface quality of Embrace was significantly worse than that of Helioseal. After the use of Embrace, the sealant margin was noticeable as a slight (distinct) step in 36% (15%). The visual (tactile) examination showed a rough surface in 78% (33%) in the case of Embrace. The Helioseal surfaces were shiny (smooth) in all cases (all differences between Helioseal and Embrace, p ≤ 0.001). Caries was found only after the use of Embrace (4%, n.s. compared to Helioseal).

CONCLUSION:

The moisture-tolerant material Embrace was distinctly inferior to Helioseal because Embrace showed weaknesses in retention and surface quality.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE:

Even if a moisture-tolerant sealant would be desirable in particular for children with low compliance, the tested material does not represent an alternative to the standard preparation.

PMID:
22552593
DOI:
10.1007/s00784-012-0740-2
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center