Evaluation of microleakage of three different types of pit and fissure sealants using invasive and non-invasive techniques (An in-vitro study)

  • Hiwa S. Khidir Erbil Technical Medical Institute, Erbil Polytechnic University, Erbil, Iraq.
  • Hemn M. Suleman Department of Pedodontics, Orthodontics and Preventive Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Hawler Medical University, Erbil, Iraq.
Keywords: Fissure Sealant, Helioseal-F, Invasive Technique, Microleakage, Non-Invasive Technique

Abstract

Backgrounds: The aims of this study were to; Evaluate the amount of in-vitro microleakage of three different types of pit and fissure sealants (Vertise Flow, Kerr), (Helioseal-F, IvoclarVivadent), (GC Fuji TRIAGE, GC corporation) and the effect of occlusal preparation on the leakage value.
Methods: Sixty extracted human premolars randomly divided into 6 groups (n=10/group). Teeth fissures of three non-invasive groups (1, 3, 5) left intact, fissures of other three invasive groups (2, 4, 6) were opened up with ¼ round bur. Teeth fissures in group (1, 2) sealed with self-adhesive Vertise Flow, group (3, 4) Helioseal-F, while group (5, 6) fissures sealed with Glass Ionomer GC Fuji TRIAGE. The teeth thermocycled between 5±2°C and 55±2°C for 500 cycles with a dwell time of 30 seconds; All teeth sealed apically and coated within 1.5 mm of the sealant margin with two layers of nail varnish, then immersed in 1% Methylene blue solution. Subsequently, two buccolingual sections were made parallel to the long axis of tooth yielding 3 sections and 4 surfaces per tooth for microleakage analysis. The surfaces were scored 0 to 3 for the extent of microleakage using a binocular microscope at 25X magnification. Microleakage was analyzed by using paired t-test and ANOVA.
Results: Invasive technique produced significantly less microleakage than Non-Invasive groups (P<0.05). In all six groups Helioseal-F in Invasive technique showed significantly the least degree of microleakage (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Helioseal-F was the best material in terms of reduced microleakage. Invasive technique compared to non-invasive technique had produced less degree of microleakage.

References

Newbrun E. Cariology, 3rd ed., Quintessence Books, Chicago. (1989); pp:249-279.

Welbury R, Raadal M, Lygidakis NA. EAPD guidelines for the use of pit and fissure sealants. Europ J Paed Dent. (2004); 5(3):179-184.

Herle GP, Joseph T, Varma B, Jayanthi M. Comparative evaluation of glass ionomer and resin-based fissure sealant using noninvasive and invasive techniques: A SEM and microleakage study. J of Indian SocPedo Pre Dent. (2004); 22(2):56-62.

Anusavice KJ. Phillip's Science of Dental Materials. 11th ed. St Louis, Mo: WB Saunders; (2003); pp:396-397.

Corona SM, Borsatto MC, Garcia L, Ramos RP, Palma‐Dibb RG. Randomized, controlled trial comparing the retention of a flowable restorative system with a conventional resin sealant: one‐year follow up. Inter J of Paed Dent. (2005); 15(1):44-50.

Hatibovic-Kofman S, Wright GZ, Braverman I. Microleakage of sealants after conventional, bur, and air-abrasion preparation of pits and fissures. Pediatric dentistry. (1998); 20(3):173-176.

Geiger SB, Gulayev S, Weiss EI. Improving fissure sealant quality: mechanical preparation and filling level. J of Dent. (2000); 28(6):407-412.

Övrebo RC, Raadal M. Microleakage in fissures sealed with resin or glass ionomer cement. European J of Oral Sciences. (1990); 98(1):66-69.

Blackwood JA, Dilley DC, Roberts MW, Swift EJ. Evaluation of pumice, fissure enameloplasty and air abrasion on sealant microleakage. Pediatric dentistry. (2002); 24(3):199-203.

Gunjal S, Nagesh L, Raju HG. Comparative evaluation of marginal integrity of glass ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants using invasive and non-invasive techniques: An in vitro study. Indi J of Den Rese. (2012); 23(3):320-325.

Duangthip D, Lussi A. Variables contributing to the quality of fissure sealants used by general dental practitioners. Operative dentistry. (2003); 28(6):756-764.

Staninec M, Mochizuki A, Tanizaki K, Jukuda K, Tsuchitani Y. Interfacial space, marginal leakage, and enamel cracks around composite resins. Operative dent. (1986); 11(1):14-24.

Prabhakar AR, Murthy SA, Sugandhan S. Comparative evaluation of the length of resin tags viscosity and microleakage of pit and fissure sealants–an in vitro scanning electron microscope study. Contemporary clinical dentistry. (2011); 2(4):324-230.

Shapira J, Eidelman E. Six-year clinical evaluation of fissure sealants placed after mechanical preparation: a matched-pair study. Pediatric dentistry. (1986); 8(3):204-205.

Singla A, Garg S, Jindal SK, Sogi SP, 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. Indi J of Dent Rese. (2011); 22(2):205-209.

Chan DC, Summitt JB, Garcia-Godoy F, Hilton TJ, Chung KH. Evaluation of different methods for cleaning and preparing occlusal fissures. Oper dent. (1999); 24(6):331-336.

Herle GP, Joseph T, Varma B, Jayanthi M. Comparative evaluation of glass ionomer and resin based fissure sealant using noninvasive and invasive techniques: A SEM and microleakage study. J of Indian SocPedo Pre Dent. (2004); 22(2):56-62.

Kwon HB, Park KT. SEM and microleakage evaluation of 3 flowable composites as sealants without using bonding agents. Pediatric dentistry. (2006); 28(1):48-53.

Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara B, Joban putra LH, Yagnik K. Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health. (2013); 5(4):35-9.

Eliades A, Birpou E, Eliades T, Eliades G. Selfadhesive restoratives as pit and fissure sealants: A comparative laboratory study. Dent Mater.

(2013); 29(7):752-762.

Sabbagh J, Souhaid P. Vertise Flow Composite: A Breakthrough in Adhesive Dentistry. Oral Health. (2011); 101(3):48-52.

Horiuch S, Kaneko K, Mori H, Kawakami E, Tsukahara T, Yamamoto K, Tanaka E. Enamel bonding of self-etching and phosphoric acid-etching orthodontic adhesives in simulated clinical conditions: Debonding force and enamel surface. Dent materials j. (2009); 28(4):419-425.

Iijima M, Muguruma T, Brantley WA, Ito S, Yuasa T, Saito T, Mizoguchi I. Effect of bracket bonding on nanomechanical properties of enamel. Ameri J of Ortho Dentofacial Orthopedics. (2010); 138(6):735-740.

Hannig M, Gräfe A, Atalay S, Bott B. Microleakage and SEM evaluation of fissure sealants placed by use of self-etching priming agents. Journal of dentistry. (2004); 32(1):75-81.

Brown JR, Barkmeie WW. A comparison of six enamel treatment procedures for sealant bonding. Pediadenti. (1996); 18(3):29-31.

Mali P, Deshpande S, Singh A. Microleakage of restorative materials: an in vitro study. J of IndSocie of PedodPrev Dent. (2006); 24(1):15-18.

Kuşgöza A, Tüzüner T, Ülker M, Kemer B, Saray O. Conversion degree, microhardness, microleakage and fluoride release of different fissure sealants. J of the MechaBeh of BioMat. (2010); 3(8), 594–599.

Alonso RC, Correr GM, Borges AF, Kantovitz KR, Rontani RM. Minimally invasive dentistry: bond strength of different sealant and filling materials to the enamel. Oral Health and Prev dent; (2005); 3(2):87-95.

Published
2021-07-30
How to Cite
Khidir, H., & Suleman, H. (2021). Evaluation of microleakage of three different types of pit and fissure sealants using invasive and non-invasive techniques (An in-vitro study). Erbil Dental Journal (EDJ), 4(1), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.15218/edj.2021.06
Section
Original Articles