BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare three different pit and fissure sealants with different composition to check their effectiveness for sealing ability and microleakage. MATERIALS & METHODS: Total 120 therapeutically extracted premolars devoid of any caries, anomalies or morphogenic diversity were collected and distributed equally in three groups (40 in each). Group - I: Composite based Pit and fissure sealant, Group -II: Compomer- restorative material and GROUP-III: Glass ionomer cement based pit and fissure sealant. Samples were cleaned with slurry of pumice and etched with phosphoric acid etchant. After thorough washing and drying, teeth were treated and cured with three sealants having different composition followed by thermocycling and immersion in methylene blue dye for 24 hours. Teeth were then observed and score was given for microleakage. The sections were photographed to show score of "0", "1", or "2" microleakage and the data was statistically analyzed with the non parametric test (Kruskal Walis test). RESULTS: Composite material was found better for sealant material as it was showing significantly least microleakage as compare to Glass Inomer Cement and promising result with compomer. CONCLUSION: Besides many inventions, researches and nano-technology implementation in dental materials, composite material is comparatively better than Glass Inomer Cement and compomer as sealant materials. How to cite this article: Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara BS, Jobanputra LS, Yagnik K. Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(4):35-39.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare three different pit and fissure sealants with different composition to check their effectiveness for sealing ability and microleakage. MATERIALS & METHODS: Total 120 therapeutically extracted premolars devoid of any caries, anomalies or morphogenic diversity were collected and distributed equally in three groups (40 in each). Group - I: Composite based Pit and fissure sealant, Group -II: Compomer- restorative material and GROUP-III: Glass ionomer cement based pit and fissure sealant. Samples were cleaned with slurry of pumice and etched with phosphoric acid etchant. After thorough washing and drying, teeth were treated and cured with three sealants having different composition followed by thermocycling and immersion in methylene blue dye for 24 hours. Teeth were then observed and score was given for microleakage. The sections were photographed to show score of "0", "1", or "2" microleakage and the data was statistically analyzed with the non parametric test (Kruskal Walis test). RESULTS: Composite material was found better for sealant material as it was showing significantly least microleakage as compare to Glass Inomer Cement and promising result with compomer. CONCLUSION: Besides many inventions, researches and nano-technology implementation in dental materials, composite material is comparatively better than Glass Inomer Cement and compomer as sealant materials. How to cite this article: Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara BS, Jobanputra LS, Yagnik K. Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(4):35-39.
Entities:
Keywords:
Microleakage; Pit and fissure sealants; Stereomicroscope
Authors: Anneli Ahovuo-Saloranta; Helena Forss; Tanya Walsh; Anne Hiiri; Anne Nordblad; Marjukka Mäkelä; Helen V Worthington Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2013-03-28
Authors: J Pérez-Hernández; F C Aguilar-Díaz; R D Venegas-Lancón; C A Á Gayosso; M C Villanueva-Vilchis; J de la Fuente-Hernández Journal: Eur Arch Paediatr Dent Date: 2018-10-15