These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical and antibacterial effectiveness of three different sealant materials.
    Author: Amin HE.
    Journal: J Dent Hyg; 2008; 82(5):45. PubMed ID: 19055885.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: The aim of this work is to study and compare the retention rate, caries-preventing and antibacterial effects of resin-modified glass ionomer and flowable composite in comparison to conventional fissure sealant. METHODS: Forty-five children aged 7-10 years with newly erupted lower first permanent molars were randomly divided into three equal treatment groups. Group I: sealed by a conventional resin sealant; Group II: sealed by resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI); and Group III: sealed by flowable composite. Retention and caries status of the sealed teeth were recorded after 1 month, 6 months, year and 2 years. In addition, Streptococcus mutans counts were assessed at baseline, 1 day, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years after sealant application. Data were analyzed by Fisher exact, chi-square and ANOVA tests. RESULTS: Group III and Group I showed significantly higher retention rates than Group II fissure sealant (p<0.05). There were no differences of the caries-preventive effects between the tested sealant materials throughout the duration of the study. Streptococcus mutans counts were significantly lower in group II compared to group I or group III up to 6 months of the study (p<0.05). After 1 year of the study the differences of Streptococcus mutans counts were not significant (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: This study indicated a lower retention of RMGI compared to flowable composite and resin sealant without significant difference in caries prevention or long-term bacterial inhibition.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]