International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 1 ( January-February, 2020 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Evaluation of Marginal Microleakage and Depth of Penetration of Different Materials Used as Pit and Fissure Sealants: An In Vitro Study

Apra Butail, Sheeba Saini, Ananya Chauhan, Swati Rana

Keywords : Penetration depth, Pit and fissure, Sealants,Microleakage

Citation Information : Butail A, Saini S, Chauhan A, Rana S. Evaluation of Marginal Microleakage and Depth of Penetration of Different Materials Used as Pit and Fissure Sealants: An In Vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020; 13 (1):38-42.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1742

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-02-2020

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Objective: Fissure sealants hold a great significance in the preclusion of inception of caries process. The present in vitro study assesses the marginal sealing ability and penetration depth of various dental products used as pit and fissure sealants. Study design: Sixty freshly extracted human non-carious premolars were arbitrarily categorized into four groups of 15 samples. Prophylaxis of occlusal surfaces of sample teeth was done with pumice slurry and sealant was applied. Later, the teeth underwent thermocycling and immersion in 5% methylene blue for 24 hours. Sectioning of teeth samples was done buccolingually and they were analyzed under stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis used: Nonparametric tests Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney were applied to carry out microleakage comparison. The percentage penetration depth was compared using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test. Tukey\'s post hoc test was applied for multiple analogies. Results: Highest microleakage was seen in glass ionomer-based sealant followed by flowable composite and least for classical sealant. Flowable nanocomposite gave comparable results with that of the classical sealant. No statistical difference was found with respect to depth of penetration between different tested materials. Conclusion: Flowable nanocomposite can be considered as a promising substitute for sealing fissures and thus can be endorsed to caries-susceptible pediatric patients.

PDF Share
  1. Motayam KE, Fouad WA, Youssef R. Assessment and comparison of nanoleakage and resin tag length of three different pit and fissure sealants: an in-vitro scanning electron microscope study. J Am Sci 2013;9(5):329–337.
  2. Simonsen RJ. Pit and fissure sealant: review of the literature. Pediatr Dent 2002;24(5):393–414.
  3. Aguilar FG, Drubi-Filho B, Casemiro LA, et al. Retention and penetration of a conventional resin-based sealant and a photochromatic flowable composite resin placed on occlusal pits and fissures. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2007;25(4):169–173. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.37012.
  4. Ovrebo RC, Raadal M. Microleakage in fissures sealed with resin or glass ionomer cement. Scand J Dent Res 1990;98(1):66–69. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1990.tb00941.x.
  5. Brocklehurst PR, Joshi RI, Northeast SE. The effect of air-polishing occlusal surfaces on the penetration of fissures by a sealant. Int J Paediatr Dent 1992;2(3):157–162. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263x.1992.tb00029.x.
  6. Bahrololoomi Z, Soleymani A, Heydari Z. In vitro comparison of microleakage of two materials used as pit and fissure sealants. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospect 2011;5(3):83–86. DOI: 10.5681/joddd.2011.019.
  7. Ansari G, Oloomi K, Eslami B. Microleakage assessment of pit and fissure sealant with and without the use of pumice prophylaxis. Int J Paediatr Dent 2004;14(4):272–278. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2004.00565.x.
  8. Prabhakar AR, Murthy SA, Sugandhan S. Comparative evaluation of the length of resin tags, viscosity and microleakage of pit and fissure sealants—an in vitro scanning electron microscope study. Contemp Clin Dent 2011;2(4):324–330. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.91797.
  9. Subramaniam P, Konde S, Mandanna DK. Retention of a resin-based sealant and a glass ionomer used as a fi ssure sealant: a comparative clinical study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2008;26(3):114–120. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.43192.
  10. Dukic W, Glavina D. Clinical evaluation of three different materials for fissure sealing after 12 months. Acta Med Croatica 2006;60(3):209–214.
  11. Sridhar LP, Moses J, Ramgeeth BN, et al. Comparative evaluation of the marginal sealing ability of two commercially available pit and fissure sealants. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10(9):ZC01–ZC04. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/19996.8413.
  12. Penugonda B, Scherer W, Cooper H, et al. Bonding Ni-Cr alloy to tooth structure with adhesive resin cements. J Esthet Dent 1992;4(s1):26–29. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1992.tb00714.x.
  13. Styner D, Scherer W, LoPresti J, et al. Bonding composite to glass ionomer with adhesive resin cements. J Esthet Dent 1992;4(s1):13–15. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1992.tb00711.x.
  14. Smith LA, O’Brien JA, Retief DH, et al. Microleakage of two dentinal bonding restorative systems. J Dent Res 1988;67:309.
  15. Bullard RH, Leinfelder K, Russell CM. Effect of coefficient of thermal expansion on microleakage. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;116(1):871–874. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1988.0291.
  16. Hamouda IM, Elkader HA, Badawi MF. Microleakage of nanofilled composite resin restorative material. J Biomater Nanobiotechnol 2011;2(03):329–334. DOI: 10.4236/jbnb.2011.23040.
  17. Hatibovic-Kofman S, Butler SA, Sadek H. Microleakage of three sealants following conventional, bur, and air-abrasion preparation of pits and fissures. Int J Paediatr Dent 2001;11(6):409–416. DOI: 10.1046/j.0960-7439.2001.00303.x.
  18. Birkenfeld LH, Schulman A. Enhanced retention of glassionomer sealant by enamel etching: a microleakage and scanning electron microscopic study. Quintessence Int 1999;30(10):712–718.
  19. Pardi V, Sinhoreti MAC, Pereira AC, et al. In vitro evaluation of microleakage of different materials used as pit-and-fissure sealants. Braz Dent J 2006;17(1):49–52. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402006000100011.
  20. Theodoridou-Pahini S, Tolidis K, Papadogiannis Y. Degree of microleakage of some pit and fissure sealants: an invitro study. Int J Pediatr Dent 1996;6(3):173–176. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.1996.tb00237.x.
  21. do Rego MA, de Araujo MAM. Microleakage evaluation of pit and fissure sealants done with different procedures, materials, and laser after invasive technique. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1999;24(1):63–68.
  22. Francescut P, Lussi A. Performance of a conventional sealant and a flowable composite on minimally invasive prepared fissures. Oper Dent 2006;31(5):543–550. DOI: 10.2341/05-91.
  23. Kwon HB, Park KT. SEM and microleakage evaluation of 3 flowable composites as sealants without using bonding agents. Pediatr Dent 2005;28:48–53.
  24. Duangthip D, Lussi A. Variables contributing to the quality of fissure sealants used by general dental practitioners. Oper Dent 2003;28(6):756–764.
  25. Gillet D, Nancy J, Dupuis V, et al. Microleakage and penetration depth of three types of materials in fissure sealant: Self-etching primer vs etching: an in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2002;26(2):175–178. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.26.2.31h2381422840n3n.
  26. Kidd E. Cavity sealing ability of composite and glass-ionomers - an assessment in-vitro. Br Dent J 1978;44(5):139. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4804047.
  27. Dhar V, Tandon S. Comparative evaluation of marginal integrity of two fissure sealants using invasive and non-invasive technique-A SEM study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2000;24(4):291–297. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.24.4.74hx7311l705213j.
  28. Ganesh M, Tandon S. Comparative evaluation of marginal sealing ability of Fuji VII and concise as pit and fissure sealants. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007;8(4):010–018. DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-8-4-10.
  29. Ashwin R, Arathi R. Comparative evaluation of microleakage between Fuji VII glass ionomer cement and light cured unfilled resin: a combined in vivo in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2007;25(2):86–87. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.33454.
  30. Singh S, Pandey RK. An evaluation of nanocomposites as pit and fissure sealants in child patients. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2011;29(4):294–299. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.86370.
  31. Autio-Gold JT. Clinical evaluation of a medium-filled flowable restorative material as pit and fissure sealant. Oper Dent 2002;27(4):325–329.
  32. Khogli AE, Cauwels R, Vercruysse C, et al. Microleakage and penetration of a hydrophilic sealant and a conventional resin-based sealant as a function of preparation techniques: a laboratory study. Int J Paediatr Dent 2013;23(1):13–22. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2011.01218.x.
  33. Xalabarde A, Garcia-Godoy F, Boj JR, et al. Fissure micromorphology and sealant adaptation after occlusal enameloplasty. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1996;20(4):299–304.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.