Introduction/background: The preventive benefits of pit and fissure sealants rely on their retention and sealing ability. The drawback of the conventional pit and fissure sealant is its poor retention due to the presence of moisture. Among the numerous pit and fissure sealants available, newer hydrophilic sealants are ideal for children. This study evaluates and compares the sealing ability of hydrophilic sealant Embrace WetBond with conventionally used glass ionomer sealant under a stereomicroscope.
Materials and methods: A total of 48 extracted human premolars were randomly divided into two groups (N = 24) and sealed with Embrace WetBond and GC Fuji VII as per manufacturers’ instructions. Following thermocycling, the sectioned samples were evaluated for sealant penetration, unfilled space, and total length of fissure under a stereomicroscope at magnifications 2.5×, 4×, and 5×. The values were measured in microns and in various fissure types using the ”ImageJ app” to measure the sealant penetrability and sealing ability. The data recorded were statistically evaluated.
Results: The penetrability of moisture-tolerant sealant was better (87.8 ± 10.7) compared to that of glass ionomer sealant (73.8 ± 15.5) (p = 0.002). Among the samples, U-type fissure patterns displayed greater penetrability (94.2 ± 6.2), whereas IK-type fissures revealed the lowest degree of penetrability (67.5 ± 7.3).
Conclusion: Embrace WetBond is better than glass ionomer sealant with respect to penetrability and sealing ability under stereomicroscope hence recommended as a better sealant for pediatric clinical practice.
Beauchamp J, Caufield PW, Crall JJ, et al. Evidence-based clinical recommendations for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants: a report of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. Dent Clin North Am 2009;53(1):131–147. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2008.09.003
Beltrán-Aguilar ED, Barker LK, Canto MT, et al. Surveillance for dental caries, dental sealants, tooth retention, edentulism, and enamel fluorosis–United States, 1988-1994 and 1999-2002. MMWR Surveill Summ 2005;54(3):1–43.
Dye BA, National Center for Health Statistics (US), National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (US), editors. Trends in oral health status: United States, 1988-1994 and 1999-2004. Hyattsville, Md: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics; 2007. 92p. (Vital and health statistics. Series 11).
Ramamurthy P, Rath A, Sidhu P, et al. Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022;2(2):CD012981. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012981.pub2
Bhat PK, Konde S, Raj SN, et al. Moisture-tolerant resin-based sealant: a boon. Contemporary clinical dentistry. 2013;4(3):343–348. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.118394
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
Garg N, Indushekar KR, Saraf BG, et al. Comparative evaluation of penetration ability of three pit and fissure sealants and their relationship with fissure patterns. J Dent 2018;19(2):92–99.
Muntean A, Simu MR, Suhani R, et al. Pit and fissure sealants penetration capacity and their correlation with fissure morphology. Med Pharm Rep 2019;92(Suppl No 3):S50–S54. DOI: 10.15386/mpr-1517
Aranda W, Courson F, Degrange M. In vitro evaluation of Embrace TM Wetbond TM pit and fissure sealant. Eur Cells Mater 2005;9:73–74.
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.
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
Marya CM, Dhingra S, Gupta P, et al. Pit and fissure sealants: an unused caries prevention tool. J Oral Health Comm Dent 2010;4(1):1–6. DOI: 10.5005/johcd-4-1-1
Markovic DL, Petrovic BB, Peric TO, et al. Evaluation of sealant penetration in relation to fissure morphology, enamel surface preparation protocol and sealing material. Oral Health Prev Dent 2019;17(4):349–355. DOI: 10.3290/j.ohpd.a42689
Grewal N, Chopra R. The effect of fissure morphology and eruption time on penetration and adaptation of pit and fissure sealants: an SEM study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2008;26(2):59–63. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.41617
