Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A comparative study of clinical effectiveness of fissure sealing with and without bonding systems: 3-year results

  • Original Scientific Article
  • Published:
European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

This prospective clinical study evaluated the sealant retention rate and caries-preventive efficacy of two fissure sealing techniques over a 3-year period.

Methods

Subjects (87) aged between 6.5 and 11.5 years were enrolled into two groups. In Group I (41 subjects), a resin-based fissure sealant (Fissurit FX, VOCO, Germany) was placed on all four sound permanent first molars (FPM-164 teeth) of each subject and in Group II (46 subjects) on 4 caries-free premolars (P1–2 182 teeth),using the following adhesives systems: Optibond FL (Kerr, USA), Optibond Solo plus (Kerr, USA), Prompt-L-Pop (3 M ESPE, USA) or the conventional acid-etch technique. Sealed teeth were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36-month intervals with regard to retention and new caries development. Sealant retention was scored as: (1) complete retention; (2) partial loss; (3) complete loss of sealant.

Statistics

Wilcoxon-signed rank test was used to analyse the data.

Results

The complete retention rate was: Optibond FL/sealant 80.01–82.92 %, Optibond Solo plus/sealant 73.78–74.27 %, Prompt-L-Pop/sealant 42.84–53.65 % versus acid-etch technique 62.86–71.44 % on FPM and P1–2 (p < 0.05). The fissure caries incidence rate was: Optibond FL/sealant 2.43–2.85 %, Optibond Solo plus/sealant 2.85–4.76 %, Prompt-L-Pop/sealant 24.40–34.28 % versus acid-etch technique 16.66–17.14 % (p < 0.05) on FPM and P1–2. A statistically significant difference in sealant retention rate was observed between FPM and P1–2, using the self-etching adhesive system Prompt-L-Pop and acid-etch technique.

Conclusion

It may be concluded that the use of adhesive systems Optibond FL and Optibond Solo plus yielded better fissure sealing performance.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al-Sarheed MA. Evaluation of shear bond strength and SEM observation of fissure sealant. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2006;7:9–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Asselin ME, Fortin D, Sibon Y, Rompre PH. Marginal micro leakage of a sealant applied to permanent enamel: evaluation of 3 application protocols. Pediatr Dent. 2008;30:29–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burbridge LA, Nugent Z, Deery C. Randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of a one step conditioning agent in fissure sealant. Eur Arch Pediatr Dent. 2007;8:49–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrow MF, Makinson OF. Pits and fissures: remnant organic debris after acid-etching. ASDC J Dent Child. 1990;57:348–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burrow JF, Burrow MF, Makinson OF. Pits and fissures: relative space contribution in fissures from sealants, prophylaxis pastes and organic remnants. Aust Dent J. 2003;48:175–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cehreli ZC, Gungor HC. Quantitative microleakage evaluation of fissure sealants applied with or without a bonding agent: results after four-year water storage in vitro. J Adhes Dent. 2008;10:379–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Celiberti P, Lussi A. Use of a self-etching adhesive on previously etched intact enamel and its effect on sealant microleakage and tag formation. J Dent. 2005;33:163–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • dos Santos KT, Sundfeld RH, Garbin CA, et al. Length of resin tags in pit-and-fissure sealants: all-in-one self-etching adhesive vs. phosphoric acid etching. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2008;29:186–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson RL, De Gee AJ, Feilzer AJ. Effect of pre-etching enamel on fatigue of self-etch adhesive bonds. Dent Mater. 2008;24:117–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson RL, Barkmeier WW, Kimmes NS. Fatigue of enamel bonds with self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater. 2009;25:716–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feigal RJ, Hitt J, Splieth C. Retaining sealant on salivary contaminated enamel. JADA. 1993;124:88–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feigal RJ, Quelhas I. Clinical trial of a self etching adhesive for sealant application: success at 24 months with Prompt-L-Pop. Am J Dent. 2003;16:249–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuks AB, Kupietzky A. Assessment of two curing systems in a self etching primer adhesive sealant: a preliminary study for a clinical trial. Eur Arch Pediatr Dent. 2007;8:171–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grégoire G, Ahmed Y. Evaluation of the enamel etching capacity of six contemporary self-etching adhesives. J Dent. 2007;35:388–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greene JC, Vermillion JR. The simplified oral hygiene index. J Am Dent Assoc. 1964;68:7–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hannig M, Bock H, Bott B, Hoth-Hannig W. Inter-crystallite nanoretention of self-etching adhesives at enamel imaged by transmission electron microscopy. Eur J Oral Sci. 2002;110:464–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hebling J, Feigal RJ. Use of one-bottle adhesive as an intermediate bonding layer to reduce sealant microleakage on saliva contaminated enamel. Am J Dent. 2000;13:187–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hipólito VD, Alonso RC, Carrilho MR, et al. Microtensile bond strength test and failure analysis to assess bonding characteristics of different adhesion approaches to ground versus unground enamel. Braz Dent J. 2011;22:122–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kakaboura A, Matthaiou L, Papagiannoulis L. In vitro study of penetration of flowable resin composite and compomer into occlusal fissures. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2002;3:205–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Locker D, Jokovic A, Kay EJ. Prevention. Part 8: the use of pit and fissure sealants in preventing caries in the permanent dentition of children. Br Dent J. 2003;195:375–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lührs AK, Guhr S, Schilke R, et al. Shear bond strength of self-etch adhesives to enamel with additional phosphoric acid etching. Oper Dent. 2008;33:155–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lussi A, Hibst R, Paulus R. DIAGNOdent: an optical method for caries detection. J Dent Res 2004;83(Spec No C):80–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mascarenhas AK, Nazar H, Al-Mutawaa S, Soparkar P. Effectiveness of primer and bond in sealant retention and caries prevention. Pediatr Dent. 2008;30:25–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nagayassu MP, Shintome LK, Arana-Chavez VE, Fava M. Micro-shear bond strength of different adhesives to human dental enamel. Clin Pediatr Dent. 2011;35:301–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pashley DH, Tay FR. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives. Part II: etching effects on unground enamel. Dent Mater. 2001;17:430–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perdigão J, Fundingsland JW, Duarte S Jr, Lopes M. Microtensile adhesion of sealants to intact enamel. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005;15:342–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perdigão J, Lopes MM, Gomes G. In vitro bonding performance of self-etch adhesives: II—ultramorphological evaluation. Oper Dent. 2008;33:534–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peutzfeldt A, Nielsen LA. Bond strength of a sealant to primary and permanent enamel: phosphoric acid versus self-etching adhesive. Pediatr Dent. 2004;26:240–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pinar A, Sepet E, Aren C, et al. Clinical performance of sealants with and without a bonding agent. Quintessence Int. 2005;36:355–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ram D, Mamber E, Fuks AB. Clinical performance of a non-rinse conditioning sealant in three paediatric dental practices: a retrospective study. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005;15:61–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simonsen RJ. Cost effectiveness of pit and fissure sealant at 10 years. Quintessence Int. 1989;20:75–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Suh BI, Feng L, Pashley DH, Tay FR. Factors contributing to the incompatibility between simplified-step adhesives and chemically-cured or dual-cured composites. Part III. Effect of acidic resin monomers. J Adhes Dent. 2003;5:267–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sundfeld RH, De Oliveira CH, Da Silva AM, Briso AL, Sundfeld ML. Resin tag length of one step and self etching adhesives bonded to unground enamel. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 2005;46:43–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taschner M, Nato F, Mazzoni A, et al. Role of preliminary etching for one-step self-etch adhesives. Eur J Oral Sci. 2010;11:517–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tay FR, Pashley DH. Etched enamel structure and topography: Interface with materials. In: Eliades G, Watts DC, Eliades T, editors. Dental hard tissues and bonding. Berlin: Springer; 2005. p. 3–33.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Trevor FJ. What’s new in dentine bonding? Self-etch adhesives. Dent Update. 2004;31:580–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentine: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28:215–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Venker DJ, Kuthy RA, Qian F, Kanellis MJ. Twelve-month sealant retention in a school-based program using a self-etching primer/adhesive. J Public Health Dent. 2004;64:191–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yamada Y, Hossain M, Kimura Y, et al. Removal of organic debris from occlusal fissures: advantage of Carisolv system over sodium hypochlorite. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2010;35:75–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yazici AR, Karaman E, Baseren M, et al. Clinical evaluation of a nanofilled fissure sealant placed with different adhesive systems: 24-month results. Oper Dent. 2009;34:642–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate the staff at the Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry of Bogomolets National Medical University for their assistance. There was no commercial/financial relationship, interest, or association that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Private Paediatric Dental Clinic, Korai 14, Of.301, 2236, Nicosia, Cyprus

    C. Sakkas

  2. Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, The O.O. Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine

    L. Khomenko & I. Trachuk

Authors
  1. C. Sakkas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Khomenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. I. Trachuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Sakkas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sakkas, C., Khomenko, L. & Trachuk, I. A comparative study of clinical effectiveness of fissure sealing with and without bonding systems: 3-year results. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 14, 73–81 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-013-0022-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-013-0022-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation