مجله دانشکده دندانپزشکی اصفهان (Jan 2007)
Comparative evaluation of microleakage of glass ionomer and resin based fissure sealants, using noninvasive and invasive techniques
Abstract
Introduction: Use of glass ionomer cement as pit and fissure sealant, has added benefit by its fluoride-releasing property. The efficacy of using invasive and non-invasive techniques was assessed by microleakage of Glass ionomer (Triage, G C Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and Resin based sealants (Concise, 3M Dental Products, USA).Methods and Materials: In this in vitro experimental study, 80 sound premolars were divided into four groups of 20. In groups 1 and 2, Triage and in groups 3 and 4, Concise was used. In groups 1 and 3, fissures leaved intact (Noninvasive technique). In groups 2 and 4, fissures were prepared with tapered diamond bur (Invasive technique).The teeth were thermocycled at 5o-55oc for 250 cycles and immersed in 5% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. Sectioned samples were observed for the extent of dye penetration, and scores were based on established scoring criteria. 0- Without dye penetration.1- Dye penetration restricted to the outer half of the sealant.2- Dye penetration restricted to the inner half of the sealant.3- Dye penetration into the underlying fissure. The data were analyzed using Kruskall-Wallis and Man-Whitney tests.Results: There were no statistically significant differences between invasive and noninvasive techniques; but microleakage of Triage was statistically more than Concise.Conclusion: Because there was no difference between the two techniques, invasive technique is not recommended. Considering the recent controversies, it can be said that Triage cannot be a viable alternative for resin based sealants.Key words: Fissure sealant, Microleakage, Glass ionomer, Resin based, Noninvasive technique, Invasive technique
