Advertisement

Lasers in Medical Science

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 1–9 | Cite as

Evaluation of different types of enamel conditioning before application of a fissure sealant

  • Philip CiucchiEmail author
  • Klaus W. Neuhaus
  • Marta Emerich
  • Anne Peutzfeldt
  • Adrian Lussi
Original Article

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare fissure sealant quality after mechanical conditioning of erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Er:YAG) laser or air abrasion prior to chemical conditioning of phosphoric acid etching or of a self-etch adhesive. Twenty-five permanent molars were initially divided into three groups: control group (n = 5), phosphoric acid etching; test group 1 (n = 10), air abrasion; and test group 2, (n = 10) Er:YAG laser. After mechanical conditioning, the test group teeth were sectioned buccolingually and the occlusal surface of one half tooth (equal to one sample) was acid etched, while a self-etch adhesive was applied on the other half. The fissure system of each sample was sealed, thermo-cycled and immersed in 5 % methylene dye for 24 h. Each sample was sectioned buccolingually, and one slice was analysed microscopically. Using specialized software microleakage, unfilled margin, sealant failure and unfilled area proportions were calculated. A nonparametric ANOVA model was applied to compare the Er:YAG treatment with that of air abrasion and the self-etch adhesive with phosphoric acid (α = 0.05). Test groups were compared to the control group using Wilcoxon rank sum tests (α = 0.05). The control group displayed significantly lower microleakage but higher unfilled area proportions than the Er:YAG laser + self-etch adhesive group and displayed significantly higher unfilled margin and unfilled area proportions than the air-abrasion + self-etch adhesive group. There was no statistically significant difference in the quality of sealants applied in fissures treated with either Er:YAG laser or air abrasion prior to phosphoric acid etching, nor in the quality of sealants applied in fissures treated with either self-etch adhesive or phosphoric acid following Er:YAG or air-abrasion treatment.

Keywords

Fissure sealants Air abrasion Er:YAG laser Self-etch adhesive Phosphoric acid 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank S. Hayoz and Prof. Dr. J. Hüsler, Institute of Mathematical Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Bern for statistical analyses.

References

  1. 1.
    Menghini G, Steiner M, Thomet E, Rath C, Marthaler T, Imfeld T (2010) Further caries decline in Swiss recruits from 1996 to 2006. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 120(7):590–595PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Attrill DC, Ashley PF (2001) Occlusal caries detection in primary teeth: a comparison of DIAGNOdent with conventional methods. Br Dent J 190(8):440–443PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gooch BF, Griffin SO, Gray SK, Kohn WG, Rozier RG, Siegal M, Fontana M, Brunson D, Carter N, Curtis DK, Donly KJ, Haering H, Hill LF, Hinson HP, Kumar J, Lampiris L, Mallatt M, Meyer DM, Miller WR, Sanzi-Schaedel SM, Simonsen R, Truman BI, Zero DT (2009) Preventing dental caries through school-based sealant programs: updated recommendations and reviews of evidence. J Am Dent Assoc 140(11):1356–1365PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Splieth CH, Ekstrand KR, Alkilzy M, Clarkson J, Meyer-Lueckel H, Martignon S, Paris S, Pitts NB, Ricketts DN, van Loveren C (2010) Sealants in dentistry: outcomes of the ORCA Saturday Afternoon Symposium 2007. Caries Res 44(1):3–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braga MM, Martignon S, Ekstrand KR, Ricketts DN, Imparato JC, Mendes FM (2010) Parameters associated with active caries lesions assessed by two different visual scoring systems on occlusal surfaces of primary molars—a multilevel approach. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 38(6):549–558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ekstrand KR, Ricketts DN, Kidd EA (2001) Occlusal caries: pathology, diagnosis and logical management. Dent Update 28(8):380–387PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ricketts D, Kidd E, Weerheijm K, de Soet H (1997) Hidden caries: what is it? Does it exist? Does it matter? Int Dent J 47(5):259–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chu CH, Lo EC, You DS (2010) Clinical diagnosis of fissure caries with conventional and laser-induced fluorescence techniques. Lasers Med Sci 25(3):355–362PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hormati AA, Fuller JL, Denehy GE (1980) Effects of contamination and mechanical disturbance on the quality of acid-etched enamel. J Am Dent Assoc 100(1):34–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Celiberti P, Lussi A (2005) Use of a self-etching adhesive on previously etched intact enamel and its effect on sealant microleakage and tag formation. J Dent 33(2):163–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    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(4):187–191PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2005) Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 21(9):864–881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Erickson RL, Barkmeier WW, Kimmes NS (2009) Bond strength of self-etch adhesives to pre-etched enamel. Dent Mater 25(10):1187–1194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bader C, Krejci I (2006) Indications and limitations of Er:YAG laser applications in dentistry. Am J Dent 19(3):178–186PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hibst R, Keller U (1989) Experimental studies of the application of the Er:YAG laser on dental hard substances: I. Measurement of the ablation rate. Lasers Surg Med 9(4):338–344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Christensen GJ (1998) Air abrasion tooth cutting: state of the art 1998. J Am Dent Assoc 129(4):484–485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Neuhaus KW, Ciucchi P, Donnet M, Lussi A (2010) Removal of enamel caries with an air abrasion powder. Oper Dent 35(5):538–546PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldstein RE, Parkins FM (1995) Using air-abrasive technology to diagnose and restore pit and fissure caries. J Am Dent Assoc 126(6):761–766PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zero DT, Rahbek I, Fu J, Proskin HM, Featherstone JD (1990) Comparison of the iodide permeability test, the surface microhardness test, and mineral dissolution of bovine enamel following acid challenge. Caries Res 24(3):181–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Murdoch-Kinch CA, McLean ME (2003) Minimally invasive dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 134(1):87–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Waggoner WF, Siegal M (1996) Pit and fissure sealant application: updating the technique. J Am Dent Assoc 127(3):351–361, quiz 391–352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gwinnett AJ, Matsui A (1967) A study of enamel adhesives. The physical relationship between enamel and adhesive. Arch Oral Biol 12(12):1615–1620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Baygin O, Korkmaz FM, Tuzuner T, Tanriver M (2012) The effect of different enamel surface treatments on the microleakage of fissure sealants. Lasers Med Sci 27(1):153–160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Borsatto MC, Corona SA, Ramos RP, Liporaci JL, Pecora JD, Palma-Dibb RG (2004) Microleakage at sealant/enamel interface of primary teeth: effect of Er:YAG laser ablation of pits and fissures. J Dent Child (Chic) 71(2):143–147Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Borsatto MC, Corona SA, Dibb RG, Ramos RP, Pecora JD (2001) Microleakage of a resin sealant after acid-etching, Er:YAG laser irradiation and air-abrasion of pits and fissures. J Clin Laser Med Surg 19(2):83–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lupi-Pegurier L, Muller-Bolla M, Bertrand MF, Fradet T, Bolla M (2004) Microleakage of a pit-and-fissure sealant: effect of air-abrasion compared with classical enamel preparations. J Adhes Dent 6(1):43–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Manhart J, Huth KC, Chen HY, Hickel R (2004) Influence of the pretreatment of occlusal pits and fissures on the retention of a fissure sealant. Am J Dent 17(1):12–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Delme KI, De Moor RJ (2007) Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of enamel and dentin surfaces after Er:YAG laser preparation and laser conditioning. Photomed Laser Surg 25(5):393–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rodriguez-Vilchis LE, Contreras-Bulnes R, Sanchez-Flores I, Samano EC (2010) Acid resistance and structural changes of human dental enamel treated with Er:YAG laser. Photomed Laser Surg 28(2):207–211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Frentzen M, Winkelstrater C, van Benthem H, Koort HJ (1996) The effects of pulsed ultraviolet and infra-red lasers on dental enamel. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 4(3):99–104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Osorio R, Monticelli F, Moreira MA, Osorio E, Toledano M (2009) Enamel-resin bond durability of self-etch and etch & rinse adhesives. Am J Dent 22(6):371–375PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cehreli ZC, Gungor HC (2008) Quantitative microleakage evaluation of fissure sealants applied with or without a bonding agent: results after four-year water storage in vitro. J Adhes Dent 10(5):379–384PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Marks D, Owens BM, Johnson WW (2009) Effect of adhesive agent and fissure morphology on the in vitro microleakage and penetrability of pit and fissure sealants. Quintessence Int 40(9):763–772PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    de Almeida JB, Platt JA, Oshida Y, Moore BK, Cochran MA, Eckert GJ (2003) Three different methods to evaluate microleakage of packable composites in Class II restorations. Oper Dent 28(4):453–460PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Heintze S, Forjanic M, Cavalleri A (2008) Microleakage of Class II restorations with different tracers—comparison with SEM quantitative analysis. J Adhes Dent 10(4):259–267PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Heintze SD (2007) Systematic reviews: I. The correlation between laboratory tests on marginal quality and bond strength. II. The correlation between marginal quality and clinical outcome. J Adhes Dent 9(Suppl 1):77–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Raskin A, D'Hoore W, Gonthier S, Degrange M, Dejou J (2001) Reliability of in vitro microleakage tests: a literature review. J Adhes Dent 3(4):295–308PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Raskin A, Tassery H, D’Hoore W, Gonthier S, Vreven J, Degrange M, Dejou J (2003) Influence of the number of sections on reliability of in vitro microleakage evaluations. Am J Dent 16(3):207–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sutalo J, Pupic V, Velenje T, Ciglar I, Skaljac G, Tuda M (1989) Scanning electron microscopic study of penetrability of sealants in relation to fissure morphology of permanent premolars in humans. Oralprophylaxe 11(3):83–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kitchens DH (2005) The economics of pit and fissure sealants in preventive dentistry: a review. J Contemp Dent Pract 6(3):95–103PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip Ciucchi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Klaus W. Neuhaus
    • 1
  • Marta Emerich
    • 2
  • Anne Peutzfeldt
    • 1
  • Adrian Lussi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Operative, Preventive and Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dental MedicineUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Dental SurgeryMedical University of GdanskGdańskPoland

Personalised recommendations