International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 2 ( March-April, 2022 ) > List of Articles

REVIEW ARTICLE

Moisture Tolerant Pit and Fissure Sealant: A Literature Review

Sharon Priscilla, GS Prathima, Suganya Mohandoss, M Kavitha

Keywords : Hydrophilic sealant, Moisture tolerant sealant, Pit and fissure sealant

Citation Information : Priscilla S, Prathima G, Mohandoss S, Kavitha M. Moisture Tolerant Pit and Fissure Sealant: A Literature Review. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022; 15 (2):233-239.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2354

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-04-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Abstract

Even in the 21st century, dental caries are considered a global burden, severely upsetting the health and quality of life of those affected. Apart from the fluoride use and regular oral hygiene, one of the most important prophylactic approaches against caries occurrence is the sealing of pits and fissures. Pit and fissure sealants are a core part of the preventive program in pediatric dentistry and should be considered as a key component of minimally invasive dentistry due to their broad patient benefit. The primary sealant efficacy measure is retention. If the sealant remains bonded to the tooth and offers a good seal, then it is right to expect the occurrence of caries to be diminished. Traditional pit and fissure sealants are hydrophobic. These materials are based on bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate (bis-GMA) and other monomers requiring a dry field which is hard to achieve in an oral environment, especially for children. This review highlights the literature on the effectiveness of moisture tolerant pit and fissure sealant, which are the hydrophilic pit and fissure sealant, and a general overview of the pit and fissure sealant materials used for sealing occlusal surfaces, its classification as well as indications and possible side effects.


PDF Share
  1. Young DA, Nový BB, Zeller GG, et al. The American Dental Association Caries Classification System for clinical practice. J Am Dent Assoc 2015;146(2):79–86. DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2014.11.018
  2. American Academy of Pediatrics. Policy on early childhood caries (ECC): classifications, consequences, and preventive strategies Pediatr Dent 2008;30(7 Suppl):40. PMID: 19216381.
  3. Anusavice KJ, Shen C, Rawls HR. Phillip's science of dental materials. 12th ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier; 2013. 571 p.
  4. O'Donnell JP. A moisture-tolerant resin-based pit-and-fissure sealant: research results. Inside Dent 2008;4(7):50–52.
  5. Babu G, Mallikarjun S, Wilson B, et al. Pit and fissure sealants in pediatric dentistry. SRM J Res Dent Sci 2014;5(4):253. DOI: 10.4103/0976-433X.145131
  6. Naaman R, El-Housseiny A, Alamoudi N. The use of pit and fissure sealants—a literature review. Dent J 2017;5(4):34. DOI: 10.3390/dj5040034
  7. Godhane A, Ukey A, Tote JV, et al. Use of pit and fissure sealant in prevention of dental caries in pediatric dentistry and recent advancement: a review. Int J Dent Med Res 2015;1(6):220–223.
  8. Sreedevi A, Brizuela M, Mohamed S. Pit and fissure sealants. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2020. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK448116/
  9. Azarpazhooh A. Is there a risk of harm or toxicity in the placement of pit and fissure sealant materials? A systematic review. J Can Dent Assoc 2008;74(2):179–183. PMID: 18353205.
  10. Feigal RJ, Donly KJ. The use of pit and fissure sealants. Pediatr Dent 2006;28(2):143–150 [discussion 192–198]. PMID: 16708789.
  11. Cvikl B, Moritz A, Bekes K. Pit and fissure sealants—a comprehensive review. Dent J 2018;6(2):18. DOI: 10.3390/dj6020018
  12. Gawali PN, Chaugule VB, Panse AM. Comparison of microleakage and penetration depth between hydrophilic and hydrophobic sealants in primary second molar. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(4):291–295. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1380
  13. Strassler HE, O'Donnell JP. A unique moisture-tolerant, resin-based pit-and-fissure sealant: clinical technique and research results. Inside Dent 2008;4(9):2.
  14. Bhatia MR, Patel AR, Shirol DD. Evaluation of two resin based fissure sealants: a comparative clinical study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2012;30(3):227. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.105015
  15. Bagherian A, Ahmadkhani M, Sheikhfathollahi M, et al. Microbial microleakage assessment of a new hydrophilic fissure sealant: a laboratory study. Pediatr Dent 2013;35(7):194–198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.215958. PMID: 24553266.
  16. Bhat P, Konde S, Raj S, et al. Moisture-tolerant resin-based sealant: a boon. Contemp Clin Dent 2013;4(3):343. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.118394
  17. El 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;9:329–337.
  18. Eliades A, Birpou E, Eliades T, et al. Self-adhesive restoratives as pit and fissure sealants: a comparative laboratory study. Dent Mater 2013;29(7):752–762. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2013.04.005
  19. Iyer RR, Gopalakrishnapillai AC, Kalantharakath T. Comparisons of in vitro penetration and adaptation of moisture tolerant resin sealant and conventional resin sealant in different fissure types. Chin J Dent Res 2013;16(2):127–136. PMID: 24436948.
  20. 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
  21. Schlueter N, Klimek J, Ganss C. Efficacy of a moisture-tolerant material for fissure sealing: a prospective randomised clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17(3):711–716. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0740-2
  22. Panigrahi A, Srilatha KT, Panigrahi RG, et al. Microtensile bond strength of Embrace WetBond hydrophilic sealant in different moisture contamination: an in-vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res 2015;9(7):ZC23–ZC25. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/11662.6178
  23. Subramaniam P, Jayasurya S, Babu KLG. Evaluation of glass carbomer sealant and a moisture tolerant resin sealant – a comparative study. Int J Dent Sci Res 2015;2(2–3):41–48. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdsr.2015.05.001
  24. Subramaniam P, Girish Babu KL, Jayasurya S. Evaluation of solubility and microleakage of glass carbomer sealant. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015;39(5):429–434. DOI: 10.17796/1053-4628-39.5.429
  25. Ratnaditya A, Manoj Kumar MG, Jogendra SSA, et al. Clinical evaluation of retention in hydrophobic and hydrophillic pit and fissure sealants-a two year follow-up study J Young Pharm 2015;7(3):171–179. DOI: 10.5530/jyp.2015.3.6
  26. Khatri SG, Samuel SR, Acharya S, et al. Retention of moisture-tolerant and conventional resin-based sealant in six- to nine-year-old children. Pediatr Dent 2015;37(4):366–370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_173_18. PMID: 26314605.
  27. Güçlü ZA, Dönmez N, Hurt AP, et al. Characterisation and microleakage of a new hydrophilic fissure sealant - UltraSeal XT® hydro™. J Appl Oral Sci 2016;24(4):344–351. DOI: 10.1590/1678-775720160010
  28. Askarizadeh N, Heshmat H, Zangeneh N. One-year clinical success of embrace hydrophilic and helioseal-F hydrophobic sealants in permanent first molars: a clinical trial. J Dent (Tehran) 2017;14(2):92. PMID: 29104600 PMCID: PMC5662514.
  29. Prabakar J, John J, Arumugham IM, et al. Comparative evaluation of retention, cariostatic effect and discoloration of conventional and hydrophilic sealants - a single blinded randomized split mouth clinical trial. Contemp Clin Dent 2018;9(6):233. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_132_18
  30. Güçlü ZA, Hurt AP, Dönmez N, et al. Effect of Er:YAG laser enamel conditioning and moisture on the microleakage of a hydrophilic sealant. Odontology 2018;106(3):225–231. DOI: 10.1007/s10266-017-0323-4
  31. Alsabek L, Al-Nerabieah Z, Bshara N, et al. Retention and remineralization effect of moisture tolerant resin-based sealant and glass ionomer sealant on non-cavitated pit and fissure caries: randomized controlled clinical trial. J Dent 2019;86:69–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2019.05.027
  32. Haricharan PB, Barad N, Patil CR, et al. Dawn of a new age fissure sealant? A study evaluating the clinical performance of Embrace WetBond and ART sealants: results from a randomized controlled clinical trial. Eur J Dent 2019;13(4):503–509. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1696894
  33. Khatri S, Madan K, Srinivasan S, et al. Retention of moisture-tolerant fluoride-releasing sealant and amorphous calcium phosphate-containing sealant in 6–9-year-old children: a randomized controlled trial. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2019;37(1):92. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_173_18
  34. Ezzeldin N, Mohamed M, Abdou A. Physical characteristics of two moisture tolerant fissure sealants immersed in commercial products with different pH range. Tanta Dent J 2019;16(2):80. DOI: 10.4103/tdj.tdj_9_19
  35. Ramamurthy P, Rath A, Sidhu P, et al. Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth. The Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;2018(3):1–3. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012981
  36. Pinkham JR, editor. Pediatric dentistry: infancy through adolescence. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders; 2005. 750 p.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.