INTRODUCTION: The difference in preventing dentine lesion development between resin-based and glass ionomer sealant materials is unclear. Two recently published reviews were unable to conclude on the difference because the comparison was an exclusion criterion in one review and there were statistical shortcomings in the relevant papers in the other (Cochrane) review. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present investigation was to carry out a systematic review on the caries-preventive effect of these two types of sealant materials under more liberal exclusion criteria concerning the statistical presentations in the publications. METHODS: Based on five exclusion criteria, the literature search in the electronic libraries PubMed and MEDLINE and the publications retrieved in the Cochrane review, revealed 12 eligible publications for analyses. A variety of glass ionomers and resin-based sealant materials had been applied in the included studies. Attributable risk (AR) was chosen rather than relative risk (RR), as used in the Cochrane review, because RR is very instable in a low caries population. RESULTS: There was no consistent pattern observed with respect to the caries-preventive effect of either resin-based or glass ionomer sealants. Therefore, it was impossible to calculate an overall AR. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that either resin-based or glass ionomer sealant material is superior to the other in preventing dentine lesion development in pits and fissures over time.
INTRODUCTION: The difference in preventing dentine lesion development between resin-based and glass ionomer sealant materials is unclear. Two recently published reviews were unable to conclude on the difference because the comparison was an exclusion criterion in one review and there were statistical shortcomings in the relevant papers in the other (Cochrane) review. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present investigation was to carry out a systematic review on the caries-preventive effect of these two types of sealant materials under more liberal exclusion criteria concerning the statistical presentations in the publications. METHODS: Based on five exclusion criteria, the literature search in the electronic libraries PubMed and MEDLINE and the publications retrieved in the Cochrane review, revealed 12 eligible publications for analyses. A variety of glass ionomers and resin-based sealant materials had been applied in the included studies. Attributable risk (AR) was chosen rather than relative risk (RR), as used in the Cochrane review, because RR is very instable in a low caries population. RESULTS: There was no consistent pattern observed with respect to the caries-preventive effect of either resin-based or glass ionomer sealants. Therefore, it was impossible to calculate an overall AR. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that either resin-based or glass ionomer sealant material is superior to the other in preventing dentine lesion development in pits and fissures over time.
Authors: Jo E Frencken; Mathilde C Peters; David J Manton; Soraya C Leal; Valeria V Gordan; Ece Eden Journal: Int Dent J Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 2.607