Advertisement

Clinical Oral Investigations

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 1435–1443 | Cite as

Impact of the intermediary layer on sealant retention: a randomized 24-month clinical trial

  • Kelly Maria Silva Moreira
  • Kamila Rosamilia Kantovitz
  • Juliana Pedrini Dias Aguiar
  • Ana Flávia Sanches Borges
  • Fernanda Miori Pascon
  • Regina Maria Puppin-RontaniEmail author
Original Article
  • 476 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

The aims of this study were to assess long-term impact of tooth eruption stages (ES) on sealant retention on occlusal surfaces previously coated with intermediary bonding layer and to determine caries prevention.

Materials and methods

Sixty-five school children were selected (aged 6–10 years), with four non-carious permanent first molar in different ES (OP (operculum present), ME (marginal edge), CE (completely erupted)). Split-mouth and single-blind study design was used. The teeth (260) were randomly selected according to treatment (sealant/technique): F (Fluroshield), H (Helioseal Clear Chroma), SF (Single Bond + F), EH (Excite + H). Sealant retention, marginal integrity, discoloration, and caries prevention were assessed after 6, 12, 18, and 24 months by calibrated examiner (Spearman = 0.91) using visual inspection. Data were submitted to the Cox proportional hazard model (survival analysis) and Likelihood ratio χ 2 test (correlation), p ≤ 0.05.

Results

At baseline, ES was 20 % in OP, 54 % in ME, and 26 % in CE. There was no significant difference on sealant retention between the treatments (p = 0.2774). However, significant differences were found regarding the ES on sealant retention (p = 0.0041). The CE stage showed the highest retention survival rate during the 24 months. The overall sealant prevention average was found to be about 99.4 % and showed no difference between the groups.

Conclusions

Eruption stages affect sealant retention irregardless of the intermediate layer and type of sealant. However, there was caries prevention on tooth occlusal surfaces after 24 months, regardless of treatment.

Clinical relevance

Sealing is recommended to prevent occlusal caries of newly erupted teeth in high-caries-risk patients. However, its application is critical on moisture limited control surfaces independently of sealer material and technique.

Keywords

Clinical trial Pit and fissure sealants Tooth eruption Retention Adhesive system Intermediary layer 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the Department of Pediatric Dentistry, State University of Campinas, Piracicaba Dental School. Specifically, our thanks extend to Mr. Norm Schiff for his cooperation and assistance in text editing and the Writing Area/General Coordination of the State University of Campinas-UNICAMP. This research was supported by CAPES–Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

This was supported by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) in Piracicaba, São Paulo.

Ethical approval

This article does contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors. This clinical trial study was conducted after approval from the Ethics Committee of Piracicaba Dental School, State University of Campinas (protocol number 143/2003).

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is required. Thus, informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Jodkowska E (2008) Efficacy of pit and fissure sealing: long-term clinical observations. Quintessence Int 39:593–602PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jurić H (2013) Current possibilities in occlusal caries management. Acta Med Acad 42:216–222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hebling J, Feigal RJ (2000) Use of one-bottle adhesive as an intermediate bonding layer to reduce sealant microleakage on saliva-contaminated enamel. Am J Dent 13:187–191PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lynch RJM (2013) The primary and mixed dentition, post-eruptive enamel maturation and dental caries: a review. Int Dent J 63:3–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ahovuo-Saloranta A, Hiiri A, Nordblad A, Mäkelä M, Worthington H (2008) Pit and fissure sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD001830Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Splieth CH, Ekstrand KR, Alkilzy M, Clarkson J, Meyer-Lueckel H, Martignon S, et al. (2010) Sealants in dentistry: outcomes of the ORCA Saturday Afternoon Symposium 2007. Caries Res 44:3–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ahovuo-Saloranta A, Forss H, Walsh T, Hiiri A, Nordblad A, Mäkelä M, et al. (2013) Sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth. Cochrane Libr 28:1–156Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dennison JB, Straffon LH, More FG (1990) Evaluating tooth eruption on sealant efficacy. J Am Dent Assoc 121:610–614CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feigal RJ, Hitt J, Splieth C (1993) Retaining sealant on salivary contaminated enamel. J Am Dent Assoc 124:88–97CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nogourani MK, Janghorbani M, Khadem P, Jadidi Z, Jalali S (2012) A 12-month clinical evaluation of pit-and-fissure sealants placed with and without etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems in newly-erupted teeth. J Appl Oral Sci 20:352–356CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carvalho JC (2014) Caries process on occlusal surfaces: evolving evidence and understanding. Caries Res 48:339–346CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Silverstone LM, Hicks MJ, Featherstone MJ (1985) Oral fluid contamination of etched enamel surfaces: an SEM study. J Am Dent Assoc 110:329–332CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hitt JC, Feigal RJ (1992) Use of a bonding agent to reduce sealant sensitivity to moisture contamination: an in vitro study. Pediatr Dent 14:41–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Askarizadeh N, Norouzi N, Nemati S (2008) The effect of bonding agents on the microleakage of sealant following contamination with saliva. J Indian Soc Pedodontics Prev Dent 26:64–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feigal RJ, Musherure P, Gillespie B, Levy-Polack M, Quelhas I, Hebling J (2000) Improved sealant retention with bonding agents: a clinical study of two-bottle and single-bottle systems. J Dent Res 79:1850–1856CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Burbridge L, Nugent Z, Deery C (2006) A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of a one-step conditioning agent in sealant placement: 6-month results. Int J Paediatr Dent 16:424–430CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burbridge L, Nugent Z, Deery C (2007) A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of a one-step conditioning agent in fissure sealant placement: 12 month results. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 8:49–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lygidakis NA, Dimou G, Stamataki E (2009) Retention of fissure sealants using two different methods of application in teeth with hypomineralised molars (MIH): a 4 year clinical study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 10:223–226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pinar A, Sepet E, Aren G, Bölükbaşi N, Ulukapi H, Turan N (2005) Clinical performance of sealants with and without a bonding agent. Quintessence Int 36:355–360PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cury JA, Lima YBO (2001) Ingestão de flúor por crianças pela água e dentifrício fluoride intake by children from water and dentifrice. Rev Saude Publica 35:576–581CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mascarenhas AK, Nazar H, Al-Mutawaa S, Soparkar P (2008) Effectiveness of primer and bond in sealant retention and caries prevention. Pediatr Dent 30:25–28PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nazar H, Mascarenhas AK, Al-Mutwa S, Ariga J, Soparker P (2013) Effectiveness of fissure sealant retention and caries prevention with and without primer and bond. Med Princ Pract 22:12–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boksman L, McConnell RJ, Carson B, McCutcheon-Jones EF (1993) A 2-year clinical evaluation of two pit and fissure sealants placed with and without the use of a bonding agent. Quintessence Int 24:131–133PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Locker D, Jokovic A, Kay EJ (2003) Prevention. Part 8: the use of pit and fissure sealants in preventing caries in the permanent dentition of children. Br Dent J 195:375–378CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Biria M, Ghasemi A, Torabzadeh H, Shisheeian A, Baghban A (2014) Assessment of microshear bond strength: self-etching sealant versus conventional sealant. J Dent 11:137–142Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bhat PK, Konde S, Raj SN, Kumar NC (2013) Moisture-tolerant resin-based sealant: a boon. Contemp Clin Dent 4:343–348CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Koch MJ, García-Godoy F, Mayer T, Staehle HJ (1997) Clinical evaluation of Helioseal F fissure sealant. Clin Oral Investig 1:199–202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Heifetz SB, Yaari A, Proskin HM (2004) Retention of a fluoride-releasing sealant compared with its non-fluoride analogue: interim results of a clinical study after an average of eight months. J Clin Dent 15:1–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dukic W, Glavina D (2007) Clinical evaluation of three fissure sealants: 24 month follow-up. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 8:163–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kargul B, Tanboga I, Gulman N (2009) A comparative study of fissure sealants Helioseal Clear Chroma and Delton FS(+): 3 year results. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 10:218–222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Reddy VR, Chowdhary N, Mukunda KS, Kiran NK, Kavyarani BS, Pradeep MC (2015) Retention of resin-based filled and unfilled pit and fissure sealants: a comparative clinical study. Contemp Clin Dent 6:18–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Feigal RJ, Quelhas I (2003) Clinical trial of a self-etching adhesive for sealant application: success at 24 months with Prompt L-Pop. Am J Dent 16:249–251PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Subramaniam P, Konde S, Mandanna DK (2008) Retention of a resin-based sealant and a glass ionomer used as a fissure sealant: a comparative clinical study. J Ind Soc Pedodontics Prev Dent 26:114–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Feigal RJ (2002) The use of pit and fissure sealants. Pediatr Dent 24:415–422PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hoffman I (2009) A moisture tolerant, resin-based pit and fissure sealant. Dent Tribune 1:17–18Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Guler C, Yilmaz Y (2013) A two-year clinical evaluation of glass ionomer and ormocer based fissure sealants. J Clin Pediatr Dent 37:263–267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Antonson SA, Antonson DE, Brener S, Crutchfield J, Larumbe J, Michaud C, et al. (2012) Twenty-four month clinical evaluation of fissure sealants on partially erupted permanent first molars: glass ionomer versus resin-based sealant. J Am Dent Assoc 143:115–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Vermaire JH, van Loveren C, Brouwer WB, Krol M (2015) The cost-effectiveness evaluation of 2 caries prevention strategies compared with the standard approach. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkunde 122:392–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dhar V, Chen H (2012) Evaluation of resin based and glass ionomer based sealants placed with or without tooth preparation—a two year clinical trial. Pediatr Dent 34:46–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Oba AA, Sönmez IŞ, Ercan E, Dülgergil T (2012) Comparison of retention rates of fissure sealants using two flowable restorative materials and a conventional resin sealant: two-year follow-up. Med Princ Pract 21:234–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ünal M, Oznurhan F, Kapdan A, Dürer S (2015) A comparative clinical study of three fissure sealants on primary teeth: 24-month results. J Clin Pediatr Dent 39:113–119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kantovitz KR, Pascon FM, Correr GM, Alonso RC, Rodrigues LK, Alves MC, et al. (2009) Influence of environmental conditions on properties of ionomeric and resin sealant materials. J Appl Oral Sci 17:294–300CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Berger S, Goddon I, Chen CM, Senkel H, Hickel R, Stösser L, et al. (2010) Are pit and fissure sealants needed in children with a higher caries risk? Clin Oral Investig 14:613–620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kelly Maria Silva Moreira
    • 1
  • Kamila Rosamilia Kantovitz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Juliana Pedrini Dias Aguiar
    • 1
  • Ana Flávia Sanches Borges
    • 3
  • Fernanda Miori Pascon
    • 1
  • Regina Maria Puppin-Rontani
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental SchoolState University of CampinasSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Dental Research CenterCampinasBrazil
  3. 3.Department of Operative Dentistry, Endodontics and Dental Materials, Bauru School of DentistryUniversity of São PauloBauruBrazil

Personalised recommendations