The efficacy of dental sealant used with bonding agent on occlusal caries (ICDAS 2-4): A 24-month randomized clinical trial

Comparing the effectiveness of caries arrest by micro-operative treatment to operative treatment: A 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of caries arrest by micro-operative treatment (sealing) to operative treatment (flowable resin composite restoration) through a 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted among 7-9-year-old children. At baseline, 630 subjects were screened and 92 children who had at least one carious lesion classified as ICDAS 3 on the pit and fissure of first permanent molar were included. Then they were randomly assigned to the sealant group (73 lesions) and the flowable resin composite group (76 lesions) to receive the corresponding intervention. Lesions status in each group was evaluated every 6 months up to 24 months. Clinical progression of dental caries and materials retention were the outcomes used for group comparisons at p-value < 0.05.

RESULTS

After 24 months, three lesions (4.1%) in the sealant group clinically progressed to dentin caries. No lesion in the flowable composite group was observed a progression. The results of Life-table survival analysis show that the cumulative caries arrest rate had no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.075). However, the cumulative retention rate was 57.5% in the sealant group and 92.1% in the flowable composite group, with significant differences (p < 0.001). The multilevel mixed model showed the sealant had higher risk of retention failure than the flowable composite (OR = 8.66, p < 0.001), while tooth position did not influence material retention (p = 0.083). In addition, the results of Fisher Exact test show that dentin lesions had more retention failure than enamel lesions in the sealant group (p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Although sealing microcavitated carious lesions of the first permanent molar achieved lower retention rate than resin composite restoration, both sealing and restoration effectively arrested caries progression for two years.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

To preserving dental structure and delaying or eliminating the need for operative procedures, microcavitated carious lesion can be arrested by sealing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn ; Feb 15th, 2020; No. ChiCTR2000029862.

A concise review of dental sealants in caries management

This concise review provides an update of the use of dental sealants. Dental sealants protect a tooth from caries development by providing a physical barrier to microorganism colonisation and creating a favorable environment for patients to clean. Some sealants release fluoride ions to promote remineralization. Dental sealants can be applied on pits and fissures of primary and permanent teeth to prevent and arrest early enamel caries. They are effective in caries prevention. The preventive fraction of resin sealant is up to 61% after 5 years. Dental sealants can be classified as resin, glass ionomer and hybrid (compomer or giomer) according to the material. Recent studies from 2012 to 2022 showed resin sealant has a high retention rate of up to 80% after 2 years, whereas glass ionomer sealants is 44%. Chemical etching with 37% phosphoric acid is the standard of care, whereas laser or air-abrasion cannot does not increase the sealant retention rate. Moist control is critical and studies found the use of rubber dam and cotton rolls had similar success for sealant retention. The longevity of dental sealant is also associated with clinical operative factors, including approaches of moisture control, enamel pretreatment, selection of dental adhesive, and time of acid etching.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

The Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry offers this review of the 2021 dental literature in restorative dentistry to inform busy dentists regarding noteworthy scientific and clinical progress over the past year. Each member of the committee brings discipline-specific expertise to coverage of this broad topical area. Specific subject areas addressed, in order of the appearance in this report, include COVID-19 and the dental profession (new); prosthodontics; periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; implant dentistry; dental materials and therapeutics; occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; sleep-related breathing disorders; oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and dental caries and cariology. The authors focused their efforts on reporting information likely to influence daily dental treatment decisions with an emphasis on future trends in dentistry. With the tremendous volume of dentistry and related literature being published daily, this review cannot possibly be comprehensive. Rather, its purpose is to update interested readers and provide important resource material for those interested in pursuing greater details on their own. It remains our intent to assist colleagues in negotiating the extensive volume of important information being published annually. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in successfully managing the patients and dental problems they encounter.