A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Retention Ability of a Glass Carbomer Pit and Fissure Sealant. | LitMetric

Retention Ability of a Glass Carbomer Pit and Fissure Sealant.

Int J Environ Res Public Health

Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Science and Technology George Emil Palade, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.

Published: February 2022

Unlabelled: Dental sealants are an excellent means to prevent pits and fissure decay. Currently, there are multiple commercially available sealant materials. The purpose of this study was to assess the retention of glass carbomer fissure sealant and the incidence of secondary caries over a period of 24 months in comparison with a resin-based sealant.

Materials And Methods: We included 32 children in the study, with ages between six and eight years and an average age of 6.8 years old. For each child, we sealed four permanent molars (totaling 128 teeth). The study group was divided into sub-groups. Sub-group A was represented by 64 first permanent molars which underwent dental sealing procedures with composite resin-based fissure sealant, Helioseal F™, and sub-group B was represented by 64 first permanent molars which underwent dental sealing procedures with glass carbomer cement, GCP Glass Seal™. The sealants were assessed clinically at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.

Results: The 6-month follow-up evaluation showed no statistically significant differences between the two materials neither regarding sealant retention nor new carious lesions formation ( > 0.05). At the 12-month recall, 57 molars had good retention (89.06%) from sub-group A and 44 molars (68.75%) from sub-group B; there was a statistically significant difference ( = 0.0187) between the two treatment choices only regarding material retention. At the last recall after 2 years, sub-group A had a higher number of molars with perfect sealing (47-73.43%) and 8 molars (12.5%) with new caries lesions and sub-group B had 23 (35.93%) molars with perfect sealing and 15 molars (23.44%) with new caries lesions; there was a statistically significant difference ( < 0.0001) between the two treatment choices only regarding material retention.

Conclusions: The glass carbomer retention is very inferior to the resin-based material. The glass carbomer sealant was effective in preventing new caries development, comparable with the conventional resin-based sealant.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8871583PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19041966DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

glass carbomer
20
fissure sealant
12
permanent molars
12
molars
9
sub-group represented
8
represented permanent
8
molars underwent
8
underwent dental
8
dental sealing
8
sealing procedures
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!