Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the retention rates of sealant placed either with conventional acid etching or Er,Cr:YSGG laser pretreatment of enamel surface. Materials and methods: This is a prospective, single blind randomised controlled clinical trial enrolling 200 permanent first molars in 50 patients, aged 6-12 years for sealant placement. Study followed split mouth design where each side of the arch was randomly allocated to the two treatment group. Group A(Acid etch group): 37 % phosphoric acid (Scotchbond, 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) was applied for 15 seconds, rinsed with water for 20 seconds and then air-dried using air spray. Group L(Laser etch group): Fissures were prepared with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser system (Waterlase, BIOLASE Technology, San Clemente, CA, USA) emitting photons at a wavelength of 2.78 µm. Laser irradiation at 1.5 W (60% air and 40% water), in a noncontact mode, with a repetition rate of 20 Hz for 10seconds was used. Pit and fissure sealant (3M ESPE, Clinpro) was applied and cured for 20 seconds. One blinded, calibrated examiner, who was unaware of which preparation method has been used and who was not involved in the treatment procedures, evaluated the sealant at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 month follow-up visits. Results: It was observed that overall retention rate in group A was slightly higher as compared to group L at all time periods, however, the difference was statistically non-significant (p-value>0.05). CONCLUSION: Er,Cr:YSGG laser etching is comparable to acid etching in terms of retention and patient acceptability.
RCT Entities:
Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the retention rates of sealant placed either with conventional acid etching or Er,Cr:YSGG laser pretreatment of enamel surface. Materials and methods: This is a prospective, single blind randomised controlled clinical trial enrolling 200 permanent first molars in 50 patients, aged 6-12 years for sealant placement. Study followed split mouth design where each side of the arch was randomly allocated to the two treatment group. Group A(Acid etch group): 37 % phosphoric acid (Scotchbond, 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) was applied for 15 seconds, rinsed with water for 20 seconds and then air-dried using air spray. Group L(Laser etch group): Fissures were prepared with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser system (Waterlase, BIOLASE Technology, San Clemente, CA, USA) emitting photons at a wavelength of 2.78 µm. Laser irradiation at 1.5 W (60% air and 40% water), in a noncontact mode, with a repetition rate of 20 Hz for 10seconds was used. Pit and fissure sealant (3M ESPE, Clinpro) was applied and cured for 20 seconds. One blinded, calibrated examiner, who was unaware of which preparation method has been used and who was not involved in the treatment procedures, evaluated the sealant at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 month follow-up visits. Results: It was observed that overall retention rate in group A was slightly higher as compared to group L at all time periods, however, the difference was statistically non-significant (p-value>0.05). CONCLUSION: Er,Cr:YSGG laser etching is comparable to acid etching in terms of retention and patient acceptability.
Entities:
Keywords:
Er,Cr:YSGG laser; Pit and fissure sealant; acid etching
Authors: Laurence Lupi-Pegurier; Marie France Bertrand; Michele Muller-Bolla; Jean Paul Rocca; Marc Bolla Journal: J Dent Child (Chic) Date: 2003 May-Aug