Tihana Reić1, Tea Galić2, Dubravka Negovetić Vranić3. 1. School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. 2. Department of Prosthodontics, Study of Dental Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia. 3. Department of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this observational split-mouth study was to compare the retention and caries protective effect of four different sealant materials in children aged 6-13 years during a 2-year follow-up period. DESIGN: Eighty children were included in this study, which was conducted in Blato (Korčula island), Croatia. Each participant received at least two different sealant materials on caries-free permanent molars in two different quadrants. Sealant materials (M1 - glass-ionomer cement; M2, M4 - resin-based filled sealants; M3 - resin-based unfilled sealant) were delivered in a random order. RESULTS: The results of this study showed that M2 (30 teeth, 46.2%) and M4 (27 teeth, 46.6%) showed statistically significantly higher number of teeth with total retention after 2-year follow-up period, in comparison with M1 (10 teeth, 19.2%) or M3 (12 teeth, 20.7%) (p < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in caries occurrence between different groups in which the sealant material was totally retained. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this study, filled resin-based sealant materials showed better retention during the 2-year follow-up period while both resin-based and glass-ionomer sealants demonstrated protection against dental caries if totally retained on the occlusal surface.
AIM: The aim of this observational split-mouth study was to compare the retention and caries protective effect of four different sealant materials in children aged 6-13 years during a 2-year follow-up period. DESIGN: Eighty children were included in this study, which was conducted in Blato (Korčula island), Croatia. Each participant received at least two different sealant materials on caries-free permanent molars in two different quadrants. Sealant materials (M1 - glass-ionomer cement; M2, M4 - resin-based filled sealants; M3 - resin-based unfilled sealant) were delivered in a random order. RESULTS: The results of this study showed that M2 (30 teeth, 46.2%) and M4 (27 teeth, 46.6%) showed statistically significantly higher number of teeth with total retention after 2-year follow-up period, in comparison with M1 (10 teeth, 19.2%) or M3 (12 teeth, 20.7%) (p < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in caries occurrence between different groups in which the sealant material was totally retained. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this study, filled resin-based sealant materials showed better retention during the 2-year follow-up period while both resin-based and glass-ionomer sealants demonstrated protection against dental caries if totally retained on the occlusal surface.