Efficacy of Glass Ionomer Cement as Pit and Fissure Sealant in Permanent First Molars

Background/Objectives Pit and fissure caries constitute a predominant portion, approximately 90% in permanent posterior teeth and 44% in primary teeth among children and adolescents. Among various preventive modalities, pit and fissure sealants play a pivotal role in safeguarding these vulnerable areas. Categorized by materials such as glass ionomer, composites, and polyacid-modified glass ionomers, these sealants offer effective protection. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of glass ionomer-based pit and fissure sealants in terms of retention rate at 12-month post-procedure period in permanent first molars. Methodology This study was conducted at the Department of Operative Dentistry, Nishtar Institute of Dentistry, Multan, Pakistan. Fifty-six children, aged 7 to 12 years, presenting with pit and fissure caries in permanent first molar teeth were enrolled. Glass ionomer sealant was meticulously applied to the affected pits and fissures. The efficacy was assessed after 12 months based on predefined criteria. Results The age of participants ranged from 7 to 12 years, with a mean age of 9.24 ± 1.38 years. Among the 56 patients, 23 (41.2%) were male and 33 (58.8%) were female. Sealant retention was noted in 31 (55.35%) patients, while 25 (44.65%) experienced sealant loss. In the 7 to 9-year age group, 19 demonstrated complete sealant retention, whereas in the 10 to 12-year age group, 12 exhibited complete retention. Concerning gender distribution, 17 males and 14 females exhibited complete sealant retention. Conclusion Glass ionomer-based sealants demonstrate excellent properties for pit and fissure sealing owing to their low technique sensitivity, cost-effectiveness, and favorable retention rates. Therefore, they represent an optimal choice for this preventive dental procedure.

Assessment of Embrace-WetBond and Fissurit F Pit and Fissure Sealants' Marginal Sealing Abilities

Objectives

The goal of the current research was to assess marginal sealing abilities of 2 commercial pit and fissure sealants.

Materials and Methods

A total of 30 premolar teeth were equally classified into 2 groups: Group A-application of Embrace-WetBond sealant and Group B-application of Fissurit F, Voco sealant. After sealant placement, samples were preserved in artificial saliva for 48 hours prior to thermocycling. Later, samples were submerged for 24 hours in a 2% methylene blue solution. The amount of microleakage based on the quantity of dye penetration at interface between the tooth substance and sealant was compared under an optical stereomicroscope. The obtained data were statistically analysed for the dye penetration scores in both groups.

Result

It was observed that 8 samples from Group A (53%) had no dye penetration (Grade 0), whereas 4 samples from Group B (26%) showed Grade 0 penetration. In 5 out of 15 samples (33%) from Group B, the dye penetration was the greatest (Grade 3; P = 0.012).

Conclusion

It was concluded that Embrace-WetBond had lesser microleakage compared to group 2-Fissurit F, Voco sealant.

Clinical and morphological evaluation of permanent first molars in Turkey

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate the pit and fissure morphology of the permanent first molars (PFMs) in the dentition of 7- to 12-year-old patients in Turkish children.

Patients and Methods

The study was conducted on 706 patients who attended the Dokuz Eylul University Child Clinic. Examinations of the patients were carried out with dental unit light, mouth mirror, and probe by two dentists. Age, gender, plaque scores, pit and fissure morphology, caries, restorations, and missing teeth were recorded.

Results

Of the 706 patients included in this study, 441 (62.5%) of them have affected PFMs. Intermediate type fissure morphology (57.5%) was seen as the most common type. A positive correlation was observed between the age and the caries experience (p = 0.000). Patients with deep pits and fissure morphology have more caries affected teeth than patients with shallow pit and fissure morphology, and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.000). Patients with deep pits and fissure morphology have significantly more plaque accumulation on PFMs compared to the patients with shallow and intermediate fissure morphology (p = 0.000).

Conclusions

Despite the limitations of the study, we can conclude that the patients with deep pit-fissure morphology are more susceptible to caries development and plaque accumulation than the patients with shallow and intermediate type pit and fissure morphology.

A 1-year appraisal of pit and fissure sealants following disinfection with and without chlorhexidine solution: An in vivo randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of chlorhexidine on the outcome of pit and fissure sealant (PFS) in permanent molars.

METHODS

A double-blind randomized controlled trial using split-mouth design was conducted for a period of 1 year. The clinical trial registry was done in the Indian Council of Medical Research, and the clinical trial number obtained was CTRI/2016/08/007222. The age group of participants involved in the trial was 7-14 years. Maxillary or mandibular permanent molar which satisfies the criteria for application of PFS was included in the trial. Based on the eligibility criteria and considering the unknown observer/instrumentation errors, the sample size is 33 for each group. Simple randomization of treatment allocation was carried out using computer-generated random number for treatment assignment of the right molar tooth. The left molar received the alternative treatment. The outcomes of PFS were evaluated by a lone proficient assessor by means of the mouth mirrors and probes following the US public health service criteria.

RESULTS

A 6-month evaluation for the PFS with and without chlorhexidine showed 77.27% and 89.39% retention, respectively. PFS without chlorhexidine suffered a greater loss of surface texture and marginal discoloration in comparison to PFS with chlorhexidine at 3-, 6-, and 12-month intervals, but it was statistically insignificant.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed improvement in outcome of PFS when an additional step of chlorhexidine is added although the results were statistically nonsignificant.

Retention of resin-based filled and unfilled pit and fissure sealants: A comparative clinical study

Background and Objectives:

The most caries-susceptible period of a permanent first molar tooth is the eruption phase, during which the enamel is not fully matured and it is usually difficult for the child to clean the erupting tooth surfaces. Sealing occlusal pits and fissures with resin-based pit and fissure sealants is a proven method to prevent occlusal caries. The difference in the viscosity of the sealants differs in the penetration into pit and fissures and abrasive wear resistance property due to the addition of filler particles. The present study was conducted to evaluate and compare the retention of the resin-based filled (Helioseal F, Ivoclar Vivadent) and unfilled (Clinpro, 3M ESPE) pit and fissure sealants, which is important for their effectiveness.

Materials and Methods:

Fifty-six children between the age group of 6 and 9 years, with all four newly erupted permanent first molars were selected. Sealants were applied randomly using split mouth design technique on permanent first molars. Evaluation of sealant retention was performed at regular intervals over 12 months, using Simonsen's criteria at 2^nd, 4^th, 6^th, 8^th, 10^th and 12^th month. The results were subjected to statistical analysis.

Results:

At the end of our study period (12^th month), 53.57% showed complete retention, 37.50% showed partial retention, and 8.83% showed complete missing of resin-based filled (Helioseal F) pit and fissure sealant. And, 64.29% showed complete retention, 32.14% showed partial retention, and 3.57% showed complete missing of resin-based unfilled (Clinpro) pit and fissure sealant. This difference in retention rates between filled and unfilled pit and fissure sealants was not statistically significant.

Conclusion:

The difference in retention rates between Helioseal F and Clinpro was not statistically significant, but Clinpro (unfilled) sealant showed slightly higher retention rates and clinically better performance than Helioseal F (filled).