| Objective:By comparing the conventional fissure sealant pretreatment technique with the enameloplasty technique,the retention rate and caries occurrence of the first permanent molar with the two materials of traditional pit sealant and 3M flowable resin were observed,and the clinical characteristics and effects of the two materials and two different pretreatment techniques were analyzed and discussed,to provide some clinical basis for preventing the occurrence of dental caries in young permanent teeth.Methods:Randomly,a total of 92 children aged 6-9 who fulfilled the criteria for inclusion had368 first permanent molars were selected.3M Filtek TMZ350 XT（hereinafter referred to as"3M flowable resin"）and vivadent sealant were used to seal the bilateral first molars under rubber dam isolation.The children were numbered according to the order of outpatient visits,and the bilateral first molars of the same subject were sealed with 3M flowable resin or vivadent pit and fissure sealant,respectively,using the Split-Mouth Design.Among them,54 children were treated with conventional fissure sealant pretreatment technique,and the other 38 children were treated with pit and fissure enameloplasty sealer technique.The patients were followed up 3,6,and 12 months after the sealant to check the retention of the sealant and the incidence of dental caries.Chi-square test was used for statistical analysis.Results:1.In the Conventional fissure sealant technique（CST）group,after 3,6 and 12 months of follow-up observations,the retention rates of 3M flowable resin were 100%,94.9%and 89.8%,respectively.The retention rates of vivadent pit and fissure sealant were 96.9%,89.8%and 84.7%;all patients were followed up for 12 months the caries rates of the two materials were 1%and 2%,respectively.2.In Enameloplasty sealant technique（EST）group,after 3,6 and 12 months of follow-up observations,the retention rates of 3M flowable resin were 100%,97.2% and 95.8%,respectively.The retention rates of vivadent pit and fissure sealant were 100%,95.8%and 88.9%;all patients were followed up for 12 months,the caries rates of the two materials were 0%and 1.4%,respectively.The retention rate of 3M flow resin was slightly higher than that of vivadent pit and fissure sealant,but there was no significant difference in retention rate and caries incidence between the two sealants.There was no significant difference in the retention rate and caries incidence between the two sealants under different pretreatment methods.3.After 12 months of follow-up,vivadent pit and fissure sealer showed that 0%,1.0% and 3.1%of the patients in the CST pretreatment group,respectively.3M flowable resin found edge coloring phenomenon:0%,0%,1.0%.In the EST pretreatment group,1.4%of the vivadent pit and fissure sealant edge staining was observed at the 6th month,and no staining was observed at the 12th month.4.In the CST pretreatment group,vivadent pit and fissure sealer showed the presence of surface bubbles in 0%,0%and 2.0%of the patients,respectively,during the 12-month follow-up period.No small bubbles were found on the surface of 3M flowable resin during the follow-up period.In EST pretreatment group,vivadent pit and fissure sealant showed the presence of small bubbles on the surface of 0%,1.4% and 2.8%,respectively.No small bubbles were found on the surface of 3M flowable resin during the follow-up period.Conclusions:Although the follow-up period was limited to 12 months due to the pandemic,the results showed that:1.3M flowable resin and vivadent sealant had no significant difference in retention rate and reduction of dental caries incidence.2.EST and CST had no significant difference in the retention rate of sealant.3.With the extension of the sealing time,the complete retention rate of the sealing material gradually decreases,and the surface of the sealing material changes,so regular visits should be made and re-sealing should be performed if necessary to prevent the occurrence of dental caries. |
PDF Full Text Request