Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Retention rates and caries-preventive effects of two different sealant materials: a randomised clinical trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the caries-preventive effect and the retention rates of sealants prepared with a new modified and a high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (GIC) in recently erupted first permanent molars. 

Materials and methods

Fifty-six children (224 teeth) were included in a split-mouth randomised clinical trial. All children had their four first permanent molars sealed with either Clinpro XT Varnish (CXT) or Fuji IX GP FAST (FJ). FJ sealants were placed according to the ART protocol. Retention rates and caries-preventive effect of both materials were assessed clinically after 24 months, and survival curves were created according to the Kaplan-Meier method. For sealant retention rates, analyses were performed according to both the traditional method and modified sealant retention categorisation.

Results

FJ sealants were retained longer in comparison to CXT sealants (p < 0.05), regardless of the categorisation used. In relation to the caries-preventive effect, no statistically significant differences were observed between materials (p = 0.99). Sealants prepared with the high-viscosity GIC according to the ART protocol survived longer than those prepared with the modified GIC, but both materials were equally effective in preventing cavitated dentine lesions over 24 months.

Conclusion

We concluded that GIC-based sealants are effective in preventing dentine caries lesions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Marcenes W, Kassebaum NJ, Bernabé E, Flaxman A, Naghavi M, Lopez A, Murray CJL (2013) Global burden of oral conditions in 1990-2010: a systematic analysis. J Dent Res 92:592–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034513490168

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Lo EC, Holmgren CJ, Hu DY, Wan HC (1999) Dental caries status and treatment needs of 12-13-year-old children in Sichuan Province, southwestern China. Community Dent Health 16:114–116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mejàre I, Axelsson S, Dahlén G, Espelid I, Norlund A, Tranæus S, Twetman S (2014) Caries risk assessment. A systematic review Acta Odontol Scand 72:81–91. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2013.822548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ahovuo-Saloranta A, Forss H, Walsh T et al (2013) Sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD001830. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001830.pub4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Deery C (2013) Caries detection and diagnosis, sealants and management of the possibly carious fissure. Br Dent J 214:551–557. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.525

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rethman J (2000) Trends in preventive care: caries risk assessment and indications for sealants. J Am Dent Assoc 131(Suppl):8S–12S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Beauchamp J, Caufield PW, Crall JJ, Donly KJ, Feigal R, Gooch B, Ismail A, Kohn W, Siegal M, Simonsen R (2009) Evidence-based clinical recommendations for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants: a report of the American dental association council on scientific affairs. Dent Clin N Am 53:131–47– x. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2008.09.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Muller-Bolla M, Lupi-Pégurier L, Tardieu C et al (2006) Retention of resin-based pit and fissure sealants: a systematic review. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 34:321–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2006.00319.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Simonsen RJ (2002) Pit and fissure sealant: review of the literature. Pediatr Dent 24:393–414

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schlueter N, Klimek J, Ganss C (2013) Efficacy of a moisture-tolerant material for fissure sealing: a prospective randomised clinical trial. Clin Oral Invest 17:711–716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0740-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen XX, Liu XG (2013) Clinical comparison of Fuji VII and a resin sealant in children at high and low risk of caries. Dent Mater J 32:512–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V (2011) Caries-preventive effect of glass ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants on permanent teeth: an update of systematic review evidence. BMC Res Notes 4:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-22

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Holmgren CJ, Lo EC, Hu D, Wan H (2000) ART restorations and sealants placed in Chinese school children—results after three years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 28:314–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cabral RN, Hilgert LA, Faber J, Leal SC (2014) Caries risk assessment in schoolchildren—a form based on Cariogram software. J Appl Oral Sci 22:397–402. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-775720130689

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Frencken JE, Pilot T, Songpaisan Y, Phantumvanit P (1996) Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART): rationale, technique, and development. J Public Health Dent 56:135–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen X, Du M, Fan M et al (2012) Effectiveness of two new types of sealants: retention after 2 years. Clin Oral Invest 16:1443–1450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0633-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. de Amorim RG, Figueiredo MJ, Leal SC, Mulder J, Frencken JE (2012) Caries experience in a child population in a deprived area of Brazil, using ICDAS II. Clin Oral Invest 16:513–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0528-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Antonson SA, Antonson DE, Brener S, Crutchfield J, Larumbe J, Michaud C, Yazici AR, Hardigan PC, Alempour S, Evans D, Ocanto R (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 143:115–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Erdemir U, Sancakli HS, Yaman BC, Ozel S, Yucel T, Yıldız E (2014) Clinical comparison of a flowable composite and fissure sealant: a 24-month split-mouth, randomized, and controlled study. J Dent 42:149–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.11.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Meyer-Lueckel H, Paris S, Ekstrand KR (2013) Caries management—science and clinical practice. Thieme, Stuttgart

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Maltz M, Barbachan e Silva B, de Carvalho DQ, Volkweis A (2003) Results after two years of nonoperative treatment of occlusal surface in children with high caries prevalence. Braz Dent J 14:48–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Baseggio W, Naufel FS, Davidoff DC, Nahsan FP, Flury S, Rodrigues JA (2010) Caries-preventive efficacy and retention of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant: a 3-year split-mouth randomised clinical trial. Oral Health Prev Dent 8:261–268

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Holmgren CJ, Lo ECM, Hu D (2013) Glass ionomer ART sealants in Chinese school children—6-year results. J Dent 41:764–770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.06.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Selwitz RH, Ismail AI, Pitts NB (2007) Dental caries. Lancet 369:51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60031-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V (2013) Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention—a systematic review. PLoS One 8:e77103. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077103

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Ahovuo-Saloranta A, Hiiri A, Nordblad A et al (2008) Pit and fissure sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev:CD001830. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001830.pub3

  27. Chen X, Du MQ, Fan MW et al (2012) Caries-preventive effect of sealants produced with altered glass-ionomer materials, after 2 years. Dent Mater 28:554–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.01.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Frencken JE, Wolke J (2010) Clinical and SEM assessment of ART high-viscosity glass-ionomer sealants after 8-13 years in 4 teeth. J Dent 38:59–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.09.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cooper AM, O’Malley LA, Elison SN et al (2013) Primary school-based behavioural interventions for preventing caries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 31:1–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/134651858.CD009378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhou SL, Zhou J, Watanabe S, Watanabe K, Wen LY, Xuan K (2012) In vitro study of the effects of fluoride-releasing dental materials on remineralization in an enamel erosion model. J Dent 40:255–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2011.12.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all the dentists (Flávia Kaster, Tereza Mourão and Juliana Grossi) and the dental assistant (Eloá  Silva Santos) who helped with the examinations; the local Department of Education, directors, teachers, children and parents from CAIC (Public School of Paranoá); and GC and 3M for donating the glass-ionomer sealant materials. We also appreciate the financial support from CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel).

Funding

The work was supported by CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Dentistry, University of Brasília, Campus Darcy Ribeiro - Asa Norte, Brasília, Brazil

    Renata Nunes Cabral, Jorge Faber, Simone Auxiliadora Morais Otero, Leandro Augusto Hilgert & Soraya Coelho Leal

Authors
  1. Renata Nunes Cabral
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jorge Faber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simone Auxiliadora Morais Otero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Leandro Augusto Hilgert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Soraya Coelho Leal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renata Nunes Cabral.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was signed by parents of all children included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cabral, R.N., Faber, J., Otero, S.A.M. et al. Retention rates and caries-preventive effects of two different sealant materials: a randomised clinical trial. Clin Oral Invest 22, 3171–3177 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2416-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2416-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation