Glass ionomer ART sealant and fluoride-releasing resin sealant in fissure caries prevention--results from a randomized clinical trial

Clinical effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants in primary and permanent teeth of children and adolescents: an umbrella review

PURPOSE

This umbrella review aimed to critically appraise the evidence published in systematic reviews (SRs) on the clinical effectiveness of sealants compared with each other/the non-use in primary/permanent teeth of children and adolescents with at least 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

A systematic literature search on 4 electronic databases was conducted up to January 18th, 2023. Following handsearching, two review authors independently screened retrieved articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias (RoB) using the risk of bias in systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool. Based on a citation matrix, the overlap was interpreted by the corrected covered area (CCA).

RESULTS

Of 239 retrieved records, 7 SRs met the eligibility criteria with a moderate overlap among them (CCA = 7.4%). For primary molars, in 1120 1.5- to 8-year-old children, data on the clinical effectiveness of sealants were inconclusive. For permanent molars, 3 SRs found a significant caries risk reduction for sealants versus non-use (≤ 36-month follow-up). There was insufficient evidence to proof superiority of sealants over fluoride varnish for caries prevention (3 SRs), and to rank sealant materials according to the best clinical effectiveness in permanent molars. One study was rated at low and 6 at high RoB, which did not allow for a valid quantitative synthesis.

CONCLUSION

Considering the limitations of this umbrella review, sealants are more effective for caries prevention in children's permanent molars compared to no treatment. Future well-implemented RCTs are needed to draw reliable conclusions on the clinical effectiveness of sealants in primary and permanent teeth of children and adolescents.

Survival Analysis of Glass Ionomer Cement and Resin-Based Sealant Retention: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study

Background and Objective: Sealant application is a proven method to prevent occlusal caries; however, long-term studies on this topic are scarce. This study aimed to assess the survival rate and clinical effectiveness of glass ionomer cement (GIC) and resin-based sealants (RBSs) on second permanent molars over a long-term follow-up period. Materials and methods: Sixteen patients aged 11-13 years with all four completely erupted permanent second molars were enrolled in the study. All patients attended 1-year and 3-year follow-ups; however, one participant did not respond after 10 years and was excluded from the final analyses. The oral health status evaluation was based on WHO criteria. A total of 32 teeth received an RBS (Clinpro), and a further 32 teeth were sealed with GIC (Fuji IX). The sealant retention was determined according to the Kilpatrick criteria after 1 year, 3 years, and 10 years, respectively. Statistical analysis included a chi-square test, the Kaplan-Meier method, and the Cox proportional hazard model. Results: At baseline, seven boys and eight girls participated in the study, with a mean age of 12.3 ± 0.9 years. The 1-year follow-up results revealed that 90% of the RBSs and 43.3% of the GIC sealants were completely retained, and no caries lesions were recorded (p = 0.01). The 3-year follow-up results showed that 23.3% of the RBSs and 0% of the GIC sealants demonstrated complete retention (p = 0.034). Moreover, 10.0% of the occlusal surfaces in the RBS group and 13.3% of the occlusal surfaces in the GIC group were filled (p > 0.05). A total of 6.7% of the RBSs showed complete retention. One-third of the sealed teeth (30.0% of the teeth sealed with RBSs and 36.7% of teeth applied with GIC) were filled after 10 years. The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a higher survival rate in the RBS group when compared with the GIC over the entire follow-up period (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Although the survival rate of RBSs was higher than GIC sealants, their effectiveness in preventing fissure caries in permanent second molars did not differ significantly over a 10-year follow-up.

Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Glass Ionomer-based Sealant using ART Protocol and Resin-based Sealant on Primary Molars in Children

Aim

The present in vivo study aims to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and survival rate of resin-based composite sealant (Clinpro Sealant, 3M ESPE, Irvine, California, United States of America) with high viscosity glass ionomer (GI) (Equia Forte, GC India, Patancheru, Telangana, India) using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealant protocol in primary molars.

Materials and methods

The design of the study was a clinical, prospective split-mouth study. A total of 100 contralateral primary molars were selected and divided into two groups. In group I, children received Equia Forte, and in group II, children received Clinpro Sealant. The follow-up examinations were performed in the 1st and 6th months. Simonsen's criteria were used to check for retention. International Caries Assessment and Detection System II (ICDAS II) criteria were used to check for dental caries. The data obtained were subjected to statistical analysis.

Results

At 6 months, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regard to retention and caries preventive effect.

Conclusions

High-viscosity GI sealants can be applied using the ART protocol and provide an alternative to resin-based sealants.

Clinical significance

There is a limited number of studies on the performance of ART sealants in primary molars. Thus, the clinical efficacy and survival rate of resin-based composite sealant (Clinpro Sealant, 3M ESPE, Irvine, California, United States of America) with high viscosity GI (Equia Forte, GC India, Patancheru, Telangana, India) using ART sealant protocol in primary molars were evaluated. The research concluded that high-viscosity GI sealants using ART protocol are effective sealants in primary molars.

How to cite this article

Kaverikana K, Vojjala B, Subramaniam P. Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Glass Ionomer-based Sealant using ART Protocol and Resin-based Sealant on Primary Molars in Children. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022;15(6):724-728.

Comparative effectiveness research of two glass ionomer cements for primary molar fissure sealing

Relevance. A glass ionomer cement (GIC) is the material for primary teeth fissure sealing in children. The research aimed to study the comparative effectiveness of two GIC pit and fissure sealants in primary molars.

Materials and methods. Sixty-one children aged 2-5 years (mean 26.99 ± 0.55 months) participated in the study after obtaining the Local Ethical Committee’s permission and the parents’ informed consents. Non-invasive fissure sealing in primary molars was performed according to split-mouth design with two GIC: Fujy-9, GC, Japan (109 teeth, FV-group) and Polyakrilin, TehnoDent, Russia (106 teeth, PV-group). Follow-ups were provided after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Complete retention, partial retention or complete loss (%) of the sealants and the frequency (%) of fissure caries development were calculated. The chi-square criterion was used to assess the significance of the differences between the groups at p-value < 0.05.

Results. In 6 and 12 months, all the cases demonstrated complete or partial sealant retention and the absence of pit and fissure caries. The following results were found after 24 months: complete GIC retention in 8.6% of molars in FV-group and 1.9% in PV-group, (p < 0.05), partial retention – 78.8% and 79.0% (p > 0.05) respectively, complete loss – 6.7% and 11.4% respectively (p > 0,05). Fissure carious lesions were found only after 18 and 24 months in 2.8% cases in FV-group and 3.8% cases in PV-group, p > 0,05.

Conclusions. Both studied GICs for non-invasive primary molar fissure sealing were equally highly effective for pit and fissure caries prevention in children. Annual follow-ups in children are necessary for GIC sealant repair.

An Efficacy Study between High Viscosity Glass Ionomers and Resin Sealants in Fissure Caries Prevention: A 2-Year Split Mouth Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

 This clinical trial compared the efficacy of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants against resin-based sealants in terms of their retention and fissure caries preventive benefits over a period of 24 months among a section of school children in the Southern Indian state of Telangana.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 A split mouth clinical trial employed 198 children, who received these sealants on their lower permanent first molars. Retention was assessed 6 monthly and caries annually STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:  Chi-square tests were utilized to analyze the retention rate and the incidence of dental caries between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis plotted the cumulative survival percentage of partially, and fully retained sealants and the survival of dentin carious free pits and fissures among both the groups. A linear binary logistical regression analysis calculated the odds ratio.

RESULTS

 A statistical significant difference was observed in the retention rate between these sealants at every follow-up stage. The cumulative survival percentage of ART and resin sealants was calculated to be 30.9 and 37.5% by the end of 2 years. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference with regard to the survival of dentin carious free pits and fissures. The odds ratio for this trial was 0.747 (95% confidence interval: 0.493-1.13) CONCLUSION:  Resin sealants fared better than ART sealants in the field of retention. However, no significant differences were observed with regard to fissure caries prevention by the end of the study period.

A cost minimisation analysis of two dental sealing methods in an outreach dental program

OBJECTIVE

To conduct economic evaluation of two sealing methods (placement of resin sealant or glass ionomer ART sealant) in preventing pit and fissure caries in permanent first molars (PFMs) in schoolchildren.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An outreach dental program was conducted in two randomly selected primary schools, one was covered by the national government-funded dental sealing service (group 1) and the other was not (group 2). Resin or ART sealant (sealant using glass ionomer material with the aid of the finger-press technique) was applied to all of the eligible PFMs in group 1 and group 2 students (grade 1 or 2), respectively. All the applications was provided at school. The cost for sealant application was recorded for each method. After 18 months, a cost minimisation analysis was performed based on the efficacy results of the two methods.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

In total, 445 sealants were applied to 126 children in group 1, and 668 sealants were applied to 203 children in group 2. Dental caries incidence was 29.4 % in group 1 and 28.6 % in group 2 after 18 months. Logistic regression analysis showed no statistically significant difference (p = 0.552) between the two groups. Cost minimisation analysis was used to evaluate the economic performance. The analytical model showed that the ART sealant was economically better than resin sealant. Sensitivity analysis showed that the life expectancy of the equipment/instrument used in sealant applications was the major parameter affecting the cost. The cost of using ART sealant over the study period was lower than that of using resin sealant. Overall, ART sealant is a less costly alternative for pit and fissure caries prevention in outreach dental services.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

While pit and fissure sealing using ART sealant was as effective as using resin sealant in dental caries prevention, the cost of using ART sealant was lower than that of using resin sealant. Therefore, ART sealant could be a good alternative to resin sealant for pit and fissure caries prevention in outreach dental services for rural populations who have the greatest need.

COMPLIANCE OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS ON DENTAL CARIES PREVENTION METHODS WITH THE CONSORT STATEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

OBJECTIVE

Reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry remains suboptimal. Considering the positive impact of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines on the quality of evidence in RCTs, the main objective of this systematic review was to determine whether RCTs on dental caries prevention conform to these guidelines. The secondary objective was to assess the association between CONSORT adherence and the year and impact factor of the journal in which the study was published.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in different databases using appropriate terms to retrieve RCTs that assessed the caries-preventive effect of at least 2 of the following materials-fluoride varnish, resin-based fissure sealants, and ionomer-based fissure sealants-on the occlusal surfaces of permanent molars. Since the first CONSORT statement was published in 1996, a time frame from 1997 to 2020 was established for the identification of studies. Selected articles were assessed according to their adherence to the CONSORT statement, risk of bias (Cochrane risk of bias tool, RoB 2.0), and journal impact factor based on the InCites Journal Citation Reports. The year of publication and other relevant data were also recorded. SPSS (SPSS Statistics 25.0, IBM©) was used to perform the linear correlation analyses to determine the relationship between the article CONSORT score (previously determined) and the year of publication and journal impact factor. A significance level of 5% was established for all analyses.

RESULTS

Of 3196 references retrieved, 30 articles were selected and evaluated. Using RoB 2.0, 8 studies were classified as having a high risk of bias, 16 as having some concerns about the risk of bias assessment, and 6 as having a low risk of bias. Concerning CONSORT adherence, 77% of the studies adequately reported the intervention domain, since the methodology for the application of fluoride varnish or sealant materials was thoroughly described. However, the participants' setting and location, random sequence generation, randomization, and the flowchart description of the losses/exclusions domains were poorly reported. Meanwhile, the allocation concealment process was not reported in 83% of the articles. Correlation analyses indicated a positive relationship between CONSORT adherence and the year of publication, as well as the journal impact factor.

CONCLUSION

When assessing clinical trials on the prevention of occlusal caries, most RCTs examined followed the CONSORT statement. However, some methodological domains remain poorly reported, demonstrating the need to improve CONSORT compliance in these RCTs.

Comparison and Evaluation of the Retention, Cariostatic Effect, and Discoloration of Conventional Clinpro 3M ESPE and Hydrophilic Ultraseal XT Hydro among 12-15-year-old Schoolchildren for a Period of 6 Months: A Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction

Pit and fissures are more prone to caries as compared to smooth surfaces. Sealing the pit and fissures with sealants is considered to be highly effective in the prevention of pit and fissure caries. Hydrophobic sealants are technique sensitive in nature. Ultraseal XT Hydro sealant is moisture tolerant which incorporates the benefits of both hydrophilic and hydrophobic sealants into one unique chemistry. Hence, the study was conducted to compare and evaluate the retention, cariostatic effect, and discoloration of conventional Clinpro™ 3M™ ESPE™ and hydrophilic Ultraseal XT Hydro sealants among 12–15-year-old schoolchildren for 6 months.

Materials and methods

It was a single-blinded, randomized split-mouth clinical trial. Schoolchildren aged 12–15 years were recruited in this clinical trial. Clinpro sealant and Ultraseal XT Hydro were placed in the right and left quadrant molars, respectively, and were assigned as group I and II. The sample size arrived was 60 teeth per group and at 30 patients based on the computer-generated random sequence. Sealant coverage between the two sealants was compared using Mann–Whitney test and Z test for proportions.

Results

After 6 months, it was seen that 10 teeth out of 44 (22.72%) with Clinpro had the sealant covering all the fissures compared to Ultraseal XT Hydro which was only 9%. Fifty-nine percent of retention rate was seen with Clinpro compared to Ultraseal XT Hydro sealant (27.27%). Caries incidence was higher in the case of group II. No difference was observed with regard to the discoloration of the sealants.

Conclusion

It was concluded that for a longer follow-up period conventional Clinpro™ 3M™ ESPE™ was better than Ultra XT Hydro seal in terms of retention and cariostatic effect.

How to cite this article

Mohapatra S, Prabakar J, Indiran MA, et al. Comparison and Evaluation of the Retention, Cariostatic Effect, and Discoloration of Conventional Clinpro 3M ESPE and Hydrophilic Ultraseal XT Hydro among 12–15-year-old Schoolchildren for a Period of 6 Months: A Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(6):688–693.

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

OBJECTIVES

 The main purpose of this article is to evaluate the clinical performance of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealant versus Embrace WetBond sealant in terms of retention and fissure caries prevention among a section of school children in the southern Indian state of Karnataka (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02716558).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 After obtaining consent from the parents and screening the children against the inclusion cum exclusion criteria, 90 school children whose mandibular first molars were caries free and with a well-defined pit and fissure system were recruited for this spilt mouth trial. The respective molars were allocated either to the ART sealant or the embrace group after the randomization process. The sealants were applied according to the manufacturer's instructions and followed up at the end of 3rd, 6th, and 12th month, respectively. The outcome measures assessed were the retention and the caries preventive effects of the materials.

RESULTS

 At the end of the 6th month, about one-fourth of the sealants in either group remained totally intact, without evidence of caries. No significant differences were seen between the sealants either in terms of retention or caries preventive benefits at the end of 12 months.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

 The chi-squared test was used to check differences in proportions. The significance value was set at <0.05. Kappa test was performed to assess the intraexaminer reproducibility with respect to retention and caries status.

CONCLUSION

 The moisture-tolerant resin sealant could not replicate the physical properties usually associated with conventional resin sealants. The usage of ART sealants was deemed to be less cumbersome in an outreach setting as observed in this trial.

Survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and sealants in posterior teeth: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study is to update the results of two previous meta-analyses, published in 2006 and 2012, on the survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and ART sealants. The current meta-analysis includes Chinese publications not investigated before.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Until February 2017, six databases were interrogated (two English, one Portuguese, one Spanish and two Chinese). Using six exclusion criteria, a group of six independent reviewers selected 43 publications from a total of 1958 potentially relevant studies retrieved. Confidence intervals and/or standard errors were calculated and the heterogeneity variance of the survival rates was estimated.

RESULTS

The survival percentages and standard errors of single-surface and multiple-surface ART restorations in primary posterior teeth over the first 2 years were 94.3% (± 1.5) and 65.4% (± 3.9), respectively; for single-surface ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth over the first 3 years, they were 87.1% (± 3.2); and for multiple-surface ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth over the first 5 years, they were 77% (± 9.0). The mean annual dentine-carious-lesion-failure percentages in previously sealed pits and fissures using ART sealants in permanent posterior teeth over the first 3 and 5 years were 0.9 and 1.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ART single-surface restorations presented high survival percentages in both primary and permanent posterior teeth, whilst ART multiple-surface restorations presented lower survival percentages. ART sealants presented a high-caries-preventive effect.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

ART is an effective evidence-based option for treating and preventing carious lesions in primary and permanent posterior teeth.

Response-adaptive treatment allocation for survival trials with clustered right-censored data

A comparison of 2 treatments with survival outcomes in a clinical study may require treatment randomization on clusters of multiple units with correlated responses. For example, for patients with otitis media in both ears, a specific treatment is normally given to a single patient, and hence, the 2 ears constitute a cluster. Statistical procedures are available for comparison of treatment efficacies. The conventional approach for treatment allocation is the adoption of a balanced design, in which half of the patients are assigned to each treatment arm. However, considering the increasing acceptability of responsive-adaptive designs in recent years because of their desirable features, we have developed a response-adaptive treatment allocation scheme for survival trials with clustered data. The proposed treatment allocation scheme is superior to the balanced design in that it allows more patients to receive the better treatment. At the same time, the test power for comparing treatment efficacies using our treatment allocation scheme remains highly competitive. The advantage of the proposed randomization procedure is supported by a simulation study and the redesign of a clinical study.

Effectiveness of Resin-Based Sealants with and without Fluoride Placed in a High Caries Risk Population: Multicentric 2-Year Randomized Clinical Trial

A split-mouth randomized clinical trial was carried out to assess the effectiveness of sealants in preventing carious ICDAS (International Caries Detection and Assessment System) 3–6 lesions within a 2-year follow-up. We evaluated the effectiveness of 2 types of resin-based sealants, with and without fluoride, their retention rates, and the caries risk factors related to their outcomes. The study included 663 tooth pairs in 400 children (aged 5–15 years) considered to be at high individual caries risk (ICR) and presenting permanent molars free of caries or affected by ICDAS 1–2 lesions. In the first randomization, molars were either randomized to the treatment group receiving a dental sealant or the control group (nontreatment), and in the second randomization the sealant material to be used in the intervention group was selected. Uni- and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were employed. At the 2-year follow-up, 483 tooth pairs were assessed: sealed molars had 83% (adjusted HR = 0.17; 95% CI: 0.15–0.20) less risk of developing ICDAS 3–6 lesions than molars without sealant. The magnitude of the protective effect was lower among teeth with ICDAS 1–2 lesions or with occlusal deep fissures than without. If the total retention rate of sealants was 70% at 2 years, sealant loss was not associated with the risk of caries (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.92–1.79, p = 0.14). Sealants allow the prevention of new ICDAS 3–6 lesions or progression of noncavitated carious lesions in children at high ICR, and the effect of the sealant was similar regardless of whether it contained fluoride or not.

Treating High-Caries Risk Occlusal Surfaces in First Permanent Molars through Sealants and Supervised Toothbrushing: A 3-Year Cost-Effective Analysis

We conducted a 3-year cost-effectiveness analysis on the cavitated dentine carious lesion preventive capabilities of composite resin (CR) (reference group) and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC) sealants compared to supervised toothbrushing (STB) in high-risk first permanent molars. School children aged 6-7 years in 6 schools (2 per group) received CR and ART/HVGIC sealants or STB daily for 180 days each school year. Data were collected prospectively and cost estimates were made for sample data and a projection of 1,000 sealants/STB high-risk permanent molars. Although STB had the best outcome, its high implementation cost (95% of cost for supervisors visiting schools 180 days/school year) affected the results. ART/HVGIC was cost-effective compared to CR for the sample data (savings of USD 37 per cavitated dentine carious lesion prevented), while CR was cost-effective compared to ART/HVGIC for the projection (savings of USD 17 per cavitated dentine carious lesion prevented), and both were cost-saving compared to STB. Two STB scenarios were tested in sensitivity analyses with variations in caries incidence and number of supervision days; results showed STB had lower costs and higher savings per cavitated dentine carious lesion prevented than CR and ART/HVGIC. A major assumption is that both scenarios have the same high effectiveness rate experienced by STB under study conditions; however, they point to the value of further research on the benefits of adopting STB as a long-term venture in a general population of school children.

Pit and fissure sealants for preventing dental decay in permanent teeth

BACKGROUND

Dental sealants were introduced in the 1960s to help prevent dental caries, mainly in the pits and fissures of occlusal tooth surfaces. Sealants act to prevent bacteria growth that can lead to dental decay. Evidence suggests that fissure sealants are effective in preventing caries in children and adolescents compared to no sealants. Effectiveness may, however, be related to caries incidence level of the population. This is an update of a review published in 2004, 2008 and 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different types of fissure sealants in preventing caries in occlusal surfaces of permanent teeth in children and adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 3 August 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2016, Issue 7), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 3 August 2016), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 3 August 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials to 3 August 2016. No restrictions were placed on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing sealants with no sealant or a different type of sealant material for preventing caries of occlusal surfaces of premolar or molar teeth in children and adolescents aged up to 20 years. Studies required at least 12 months follow-up. We excluded studies that compared compomers to resins/composites.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We presented outcomes for caries or no caries on occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth as odds ratio (OR) or risk ratio (RR). We used mean difference (MD) for mean caries increment. All measures were presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model for comparisons where there were more than three trials; otherwise we used the fixed-effect model. We used GRADE methods to assess evidence quality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 trials that involved a total of 7924 children; seven trials were new for this update (1693 participants). Fifteen trials evaluated the effects of resin-based sealant versus no sealant (3620 participants in 14 studies plus 575 tooth pairs in one study); three trials with evaluated glass ionomer sealant versus no sealant (905 participants); and 24 trials evaluated one type of sealant versus another (4146 participants). Children were aged from 5 to 16 years. Trials rarely reported background exposure to fluoride of trial participants or baseline caries prevalence. Resin-based sealant versus no sealant: second-, third- and fourth-generation resin-based sealants prevented caries in first permanent molars in children aged 5 to 10 years (at 24 months follow-up: OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.19, 7 trials (5 published in the 1970s; 2 in the 2010s), 1548 children randomised, 1322 children evaluated; moderate-quality evidence). If we were to assume that 16% of the control tooth surfaces were decayed during 24 months of follow-up (160 carious teeth per 1000), then applying a resin-based sealant would reduce the proportion of carious surfaces to 5.2% (95% CI 3.13% to 7.37%). Similarly, assuming that 40% of control tooth surfaces were decayed (400 carious teeth per 1000), then applying a resin-based sealant would reduce the proportion of carious surfaces to 6.25% (95% CI 3.84% to 9.63%). If 70% of control tooth surfaces were decayed, there would be 19% decayed surfaces in the sealant group (95% CI 12.3% to 27.2%). This caries-preventive effect was maintained at longer follow-up but evidence quality and quantity was reduced (e.g. at 48 to 54 months of follow-up: OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.28, 4 trials, 482 children evaluated; RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.45, 203 children evaluated). Although studies were generally well conducted, we assessed blinding of outcome assessment for caries at high risk of bias for all trials (blinding of outcome assessment is not possible in sealant studies because outcome assessors can see and identify sealant). Glass ionomer sealant versus no sealant: was evaluated by three studies. Results at 24 months were inconclusive (very low-quality evidence). One sealant versus another sealant: the relative effectiveness of different types of sealants is unknown (very low-quality evidence). We included 24 trials that directly compared two different sealant materials. Comparisons varied in terms of types of sealant assessed, outcome measures chosen and duration of follow-up. Adverse events: only four trials assessed adverse events. No adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Resin-based sealants applied on occlusal surfaces of permanent molars are effective for preventing caries in children and adolescents. Our review found moderate-quality evidence that resin-based sealants reduced caries by between 11% and 51% compared to no sealant, when measured at 24 months. Similar benefit was seen at timepoints up to 48 months; after longer follow-up, the quantity and quality of evidence was reduced. There was insufficient evidence to judge the effectiveness of glass ionomer sealant or the relative effectiveness of different types of sealants. Information on adverse effects was limited but none occurred where this was reported. Further research with long follow-up is needed.

Retention and caries-preventive effect of glass ionomer and resin-based sealants: An 18-month-randomized clinical trial

The objective of this study was to compare the retention and caries-preventive effect of glass ionomer (Fuji Triage) and resin-based (Clinpro) sealants among 6-9-year-old children. This split-mouth, randomized clinical trial covered 35 children/140 fully erupted permanent first molars. Evaluation was conducted by two independent examiners after 6, 12, and 18 months and the data were compared in relation to the children's caries risk and age groups. The Kaplan-Meier survival method and chi-square test were used for analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in the survival of partial and fully retained sealants or in the survival of caries-free pits and fissures between glass-ionomer and resin-based sealants. In terms of retention, both sealants performed better in the younger age group at the end of the study, and showed better caries prevention in moderate caries risk children. After 18 months, both sealants had comparable retention and caries-preventive effects in 6-9-year old children.

Caries-Preventive Effect of High-Viscosity Glass Ionomer and Resin-Based Fissure Sealants on Permanent Teeth: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Glass-ionomers are traditionally regarded to be inferior to resin as fissure sealants in protecting teeth from dental caries, due to their comparatively lower retention rate. Unlike low-viscosity glass-ionomers, high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements (HVGIC) are placed as sealants by pressing the material into pits and fissures with a petroleum-jelly-coated index finger. Hence, HVGIC sealants are assumed to penetrate pits and fissures deeper, resulting in a higher material retention rate, which may increase its caries-preventive effect.

METHODS

The aim of this review was to answer the question as to whether, in patients with fully erupted permanent molar teeth, HVGIC based fissure sealants are less effective to protect against dental carious lesions in occlusal pits and fissures than resin-based fissure sealants? A systematic literature search in eight databases was conducted. Heterogeneity of accepted trials and imprecision of the established evidence were assessed. Extracted sufficiently homogenous datasets were pooled by use of a random-effects meta-analysis. Internal trial validity was evaluated. The protocol of this systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO / Nr.: CRD42015016007).

RESULTS

Seven clinical trials were provisionally included for further review. Of these, one was excluded. Seven trial reports reporting on six trials were accepted. From these, 11 datasets were extracted and pooled in four meta-analyses. The results suggest no statistically significant differences after up to 48 months and borderline significant differences in favour of HVGIC sealants after 60 months (RR 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09-0.95; p = 0.04 / RD -0.07; 95% CI: -0.14, -0.01). The point estimates and upper confidence levels after 24, 36, 48 and 60 months of RR 1.36; RR 0.90; RR 0.62; RR 0.29 and 2.78; 1.67; 1.21; 0.95, respectively, further suggest a chronological trend in favour of HVGIC above resin-based sealants. The internal trial validity was judged to be low and the bias risk high for all trials. Imprecision of results was considered too high for clinical guidance.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that: (i) Inferiority claims against HVGIC in comparison to resin-based sealants as current gold-standard are not supported by the clinical evidence; (ii) The clinical evidence suggests similar caries-preventive efficacy of HVGIC and resin-based sealants after a period of 48 months in permanent molar teeth but remains challenged by high bias risk; (iii) Evidence concerning a possible superiority of HVGIC above resin-based sealants after 60 months is poor (even if the high bias risk is disregarded) due to imprecision and requires corroboration through future research.