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

A. Alsaffar, Daranee Versluis, Antheunis Versluis, S. Beiraghi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

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 2011

Fingerprint

Pit and Fissure Sealants
Dental Enamel
Minerals
Fluorides
Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate
Acids
Triage
Lactic Acid
Analysis of Variance
Gels
Students
amorphous calcium phosphate
glass ionomer

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Protective effect of pit and fissure sealants on demineralization of adjacent enamel. / Alsaffar, A.; Versluis, Daranee; Versluis, Antheunis; Beiraghi, S.

In: Pediatric Dentistry, Vol. 33, No. 7, 11.2011, p. 491-495.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{111222ddae834f329e9263c18bd06b41,
title = "Protective effect of pit and fissure sealants on demineralization of adjacent enamel",
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.",
author = "A. Alsaffar and Daranee Versluis and Antheunis Versluis and S. Beiraghi",
year = "2011",
month = "11",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "491--495",
journal = "Pediatric Dentistry",
issn = "0164-1263",
publisher = "American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Protective effect of pit and fissure sealants on demineralization of adjacent enamel

AU - Alsaffar, A.

AU - Versluis, Daranee

AU - Versluis, Antheunis

AU - Beiraghi, S.

PY - 2011/11

Y1 - 2011/11

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=83655203004&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=83655203004&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 491

EP - 495

JO - Pediatric Dentistry

JF - Pediatric Dentistry

SN - 0164-1263

IS - 7

ER -