Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2010 Apr;11(2):88-92.
doi: 10.1007/BF03262718.

A two-year evaluation of four different fissure sealants

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

A two-year evaluation of four different fissure sealants

Y Yilmaz et al. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2010 Apr.

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate fissure sealants based on Bis-GMA [Fissurit F (FF) and Fissurit FX (FFX)], compomer [Dyract Seal (DS)] and ormocer [Admira Seal (AS)] with respect to retention, marginal integrity and presence of caries after a 2-year period of follow-up.

Methods: 80 children aged 7-13 years (mean age: 9.4 + 1.3 years), were included, giving a total of 320 first permanent molars for the study units. Clinical evaluation of the sealants was carried out to assess retention, marginal integrity and presence of caries at 12 and 24 months after initial treatment.

Results: Retention of compomer-based DS sealant was significantly lower than that of the others at the 12- and 24-month follow-up examinations (12 month, P<0.000; 24 month, P<0.006). No significant differences between the sealants were observed in marginal integrity (12 month, P>0.473; 24 month, P>0.069) or presence of caries (12 month, P>0.055; 24 month, P>0.777) at any follow-up examination.

Conclusion: While sealants composed of different resin matrices showed differences in retention, they were similar with respect to marginal integrity and presence of caries. Surface conditioning and the organic structure of the material are factors that may affect sealant retention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Quintessence Int. 2005 May;36(5):339-44 - PubMed
    1. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005 Jan;15(1):61-6 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2006 Spring;30(3):215-8 - PubMed
    1. J Dent Res. 1987 Oct;66(10):1591-3 - PubMed
    1. Am J Dent. 2000 Nov;13(Spec No):35D-40D - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources