Effect of Different Enamel Preparation Methods on Microleakage of Fissure Sealant: An In Vitro Study
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 32 No. 4 (2014),
25 October 2014
,
Page 216-221
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v32i4.24779
Abstract
Objective: Lack of a dental material with optimal adhesion and sealability is an important challenge in modern dentistry leading to marginal leakage. There are controversies on the necessity of enamel preparation in pit and fissure sealant therapy and its effect on decreasing the microleakage; therefore, the present in vitro study aimed to assess the amount of microleakage with and without enamel preparation.
Methods: In this experimental study, 30 sound premolars assigned suitable for sealant application, were chosen and randomly divided into two groups. Sealant was applied to all teeth with the same conventional technique. In group A, fissure sealant was applied without enamel preparation while in group B, sealant was applied after fissurotomy with bur. The teeth were thermocycled and microleakage was measured using silver nitrate as leakage tracer. The teeth were then cut into three bucco-lingual sections and examined under a stereomicroscope with 32× magnification. The amount of dye penetration into the sealant was recorded in microns and the degree of microleakage was classified into four degrees of 0, 1, 2 and 3. T-test was applied for the comparison of data between the two groups.
Results: In total,20% of specimens in group B (fissurotomy) had degree 1 and 80% had degree 0microleakage and no specimen had degrees 2 and 3 microleakage, while in group A (no preparation), 20% had degree 1, 33.3% had degree 2 and 46.7% had degree 3microleakage. No specimen had degree 0 microleakage. Therefore, placement of sealant with enamel preparation significantly decreased microleakage (p<0.001).
Conclusion: In view of the findings of this investigation, it seems that enamel preparation reduces marginal leakage in pit and fissure sealant therapy.
- Fissure sealant
- Microleakage
- Pit
- Tooth preparation
How to Cite
References
Chaitra TR, Subba Reddy VV, Devarasa GM, Ravishankar TL. Flowable resin used as a sealant in molars using conventional, enameloplasty and fissurotomy techniques: an in vitro study. J Indian SocPedodPrevDent 2010; 28: 145- 150.
Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift EJ. Sturdevant's art and science of operative dentistry. 5th Ed.
Missouri: The C.V. Mosby Co. 2006; Chap 5: 245-67.
Summitt JB, Robbins JW, Hilton TJ, Schwartz RS. Fundamentals of operative dentistry a contemporary approach. 3rd Ed. Chicago: Quintessence 2006; Chap 8: 231-234.
Agrawal A, Shigli A. Comparison of six different methods of cleaning and preparing occlusal fissure surface before placement of pit and fissure sealant: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2012; 30: 51- 55.
Borsatto MC, Corona SA, Chinelatti MA, Ramos RP, de Sá Rocha RA, Pecora JD, et al.. Comparison of marginal microleakage of flowable composite restorations in primary molars prepared by high-speed carbide bur, Er:YAG laser, and air abrasion. J Dent Child 2006; 73: 122- 126.
Baygin O, Korkmaz FM, Tüzüner T, Tanriver M. The effect of different enamel surface treatments on the microleakage of fissure sealants. Lasers Med Sci 2012; 27: 153-160.
Salama FS, Al-Hammad NS. Marginal seal of sealant and compomer materials with and without enameloplasty. Int J Paediatr Dent 2002; 12: 39- 46.
Khanna R, Pandey RK, Singh N, Agarwal A. A comparison of enameloplasty sealant technique with conventional sealant technique: a scanning electron microscope study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2009; 27: 158-163.
Subramaniam P, Babu KL, Naveen HK. Effect of tooth preparation on sealant success--an in vitro
study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2009; 33: 325-331.
Dhar V, Chen H. Evaluation of resin based and glass ionomer based sealants placed with or without tooth preparation-a two year clinical trial. Pediatr Dent 2012; 34: 46-50.
Castro LC, Galvão AC. Comparison of three different preparation methods in the improvement of sealant retention. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2004; 28: 249-252.
Youssef MN, Youssef FA, Souza-Zaroni WC, Turbino ML, Vieira MM. Effect of enamel preparation method on in vitro marginal microleakage of a flowable composite used as pit and fissure sealant. Int J Paediatr Dent 2006; 16: 342-347.
Lupi-Pégurier L, Muller-Bolla M, Bertrand MF, Fradet T, Bolla M. Microleakage of a pit-and- fissure sealant: effect of air-abrasion compared with classical enamel preparations. J Adhes Dent 2004; 6: 43-48.
Srinivasan V, Deery C, Nugent Z. In vitro microleakage of repaired fissure sealants: a randomized, controlled trial. Int J Paediatr Dent 2005; 15: 51-60.
Kramer N, García-Godoy F, Lohbauer U, Schneider K, Assmann I, Frankenberger R. Preparation for invasive pit and fissure sealing: air-abrasion or bur? Am J Dent 2008; 21: 383-387.
Francescut P, Lussi A. Performance of a conventional sealant and a flowable composite on minimally invasive prepared fissures. Oper Dent 2006; 31: 543-550.
Bahrololoomi Z, Soleymani A, Heydari Z. In vitro comparison of microleakage of two materials used as pit and fissure sealants. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2011; 5: 83-86.
Bagherian A, Akbari M, Rezaeian M, Ansari GH. Microleakage assessment of fissure sealant following fissurotomy bur or pumice prophylaxis use before etching.Dent Res J 2013; 10: 643- 646.
Singla A, Garg S, Jindal SK, Suma Sogi HP, Sharma D. In vitro evaluation of marginal leakage using invasive and noninvasive technique of light cure glass ionomer and flowable polyacid modified composite resin used as pit and fissure sealant. Indian J Dent Res 2011; 22: 205-209.
- Abstract Viewed: 191 times
- PDF Downloaded: 121 times