IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i4p1966-d745920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Retention Ability of a Glass Carbomer Pit and Fissure Sealant

Author

Listed:
  • Liana Beresescu

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

  • Monika Kovacs

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

  • Alexandru Vlasa

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

  • Alexandra Mihaela Stoica

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

  • Csilla Benedek

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

  • Mihai Pop

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

  • Denisa Bungardean

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

  • Daniela Eșian

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania)

Abstract

Dental sealants are an excellent means to prevent pits and fissure decay. Currently, there are multiple commercially available sealant materials. The purpose of this study was to assess the retention of glass carbomer fissure sealant and the incidence of secondary caries over a period of 24 months in comparison with a resin-based sealant. Materials and Methods: We included 32 children in the study, with ages between six and eight years and an average age of 6.8 years old. For each child, we sealed four permanent molars (totaling 128 teeth). The study group was divided into sub-groups. Sub-group A was represented by 64 first permanent molars which underwent dental sealing procedures with composite resin-based fissure sealant, Helioseal F™, and sub-group B was represented by 64 first permanent molars which underwent dental sealing procedures with glass carbomer cement, GCP Glass Seal™. The sealants were assessed clinically at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Results: The 6-month follow-up evaluation showed no statistically significant differences between the two materials neither regarding sealant retention nor new carious lesions formation ( p > 0.05). At the 12-month recall, 57 molars had good retention (89.06%) from sub-group A and 44 molars (68.75%) from sub-group B; there was a statistically significant difference ( p = 0.0187) between the two treatment choices only regarding material retention. At the last recall after 2 years, sub-group A had a higher number of molars with perfect sealing (47–73.43%) and 8 molars (12.5%) with new caries lesions and sub-group B had 23 (35.93%) molars with perfect sealing and 15 molars (23.44%) with new caries lesions; there was a statistically significant difference ( p < 0.0001) between the two treatment choices only regarding material retention. Conclusions: The glass carbomer retention is very inferior to the resin-based material. The glass carbomer sealant was effective in preventing new caries development, comparable with the conventional resin-based sealant.

Suggested Citation

  • Liana Beresescu & Monika Kovacs & Alexandru Vlasa & Alexandra Mihaela Stoica & Csilla Benedek & Mihai Pop & Denisa Bungardean & Daniela Eșian, 2022. "Retention Ability of a Glass Carbomer Pit and Fissure Sealant," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-8, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:1966-:d:745920
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/1966/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/1966/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:1966-:d:745920. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.