Retention of moisture-tolerant and conventional resin-based sealant in six- to nine-year-old children

Sachin G. Khatri, Srinivasan Raj Samuel, Shashidhar Acharya, Snehal Patil, Kavita Madan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the retention rates and development of caries in permanent molars in children sealed with moisture-tolerant, resin-based (Embrace WetBond), and conventional resin-based (Helioseal) sealant over a period of one year. Methods: This was a double blind, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial among six- to nine-year-olds. Sixty-eight permanent mandibular first molars in 34 children were randomly assigned to be sealed with Embrace WetBond or Helioseal sealant. Results: The final sample was 32 children with 64 teeth. At 12 months, 23 of 32 (72 percent) sealants were completely retained in Embrace WetBond, whereas only 16 of 32 (50 percent) were retained in the Helioseal group. There was a statistically significant difference in retention rates of Embrace WetBond and Helioseal sealants at 12 months (P<.05). At 12 months follow-up, only two teeth developed caries in Embrace WetBond; in the Helioseal group, five teeth developed caries (two initial and three enamel caries). Conclusions: Embrace WetBond was superior to Helioseal sealant, as Embrace exhibited higher retention and lower caries scores. Embrace WetBond can be preferred over conventional resin-based sealants for community and outreach sealant programs where use of rubber dam for moisture control is difficult to practice.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)366-370
Number of pages5
JournalPediatric Dentistry
Volume37
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 01-07-2015

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Retention of moisture-tolerant and conventional resin-based sealant in six- to nine-year-old children'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this