Protective effect of pit and fissure sealants on demineralization of adjacent enamel

A. Alsaffar, D. Tantbirojn, A. Versluis, S. Beiraghi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: This study's purpose was to evaluate the in vitro effect of sealants in protecting adjacent enamel from acid demineralization. Methods: Occlusal fissures of extracted molars (n=10) were sealed with: conventional nonfluoride (DO; Delton Opaque) resin-based sealant (RBS); fluoride-containing RBS (US; UltraSeal XT plus, and CP; Clinpro); amorphous calcium phosphate-containing RBS (BW; Bosworth Aegis); or glass ionomer sealant (FT; Fuji Triage). The specimens were immersed in lactic acid gel for 20 days to create demineralized lesions on the occlusal enamel. Cross-sectional microhardness was measured at the lesion 0.5 mm from the sealant margin. Mineral loss (δZ, volume % mineral × μm) was calculated from the microhardness values and subjected to analysis of variance and student-Newman-Keuls tests. Results: Mineral loss values (mean ± SD) were: 1,975±806, 1,802±512, 1,004±421, 1,275±375, and 88±124 for DO, US, CP, BW, and FT, respectively; δZ for DO and US was significantly higher, and δZ for FT was significantly lower than that for CP and BW (P=.05). Conclusions: Resin-based sealants containing fluoride or amorphous calcium phosphate may provide some protective effect on demineralization of adjacent enamel vs conventional nonfluoride sealant. Glass ionomer sealant was the most effective in protecting adjacent enamel from acid demineralization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)491-495
Number of pages5
JournalPediatric dentistry
Volume33
Issue number7
StatePublished - Nov 1 2011

Keywords

  • Amorphous Calcium Phosphate
  • Demineralization
  • Fluoride
  • Pit and Fissure Sealants

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Protective effect of pit and fissure sealants on demineralization of adjacent enamel'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this