Burbridge L, Nugent Z, Deery C
Edinburgh Dental Institute, Edinburgh, UK.
Int J Paediatr Dent. 2006 Nov;16(6):424-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2006.00764.x.
The objectives of this study were: to compare the retention of fissure sealants (sealants) placed on occlusal surfaces following the use of a self-etching priming agent and traditional acid etch; to compare the caries incidence of occlusal surfaces sealed using the two techniques; and to compare the ease of placement of sealant following the use of the two techniques, as assessed by subjects and operators.
The study took the form of a randomized controlled trial conducted in UK National Health Service community dental service and dental hospital clinics. Sixty subjects were recruited to this study by seven dental professionals who placed sealants on lower permanent molar pairs. The technique used for enamel preparation prior to sealant placement on the right and left side of the lower arch was randomized. On one side of the lower arch, Xeno III was used to prepare the occlusal enamel, and on the other, phosphoric acid etch together with Prime & Bond was used. Opaque Delton was used to seal all surfaces. Subjects were blinded to the techniques used. The subjects and operators recorded their impressions of the techniques used on individual questionnaires.
Forty-six (77%) of the 60 subjects were reviewed by the principal researcher after 6 months. The retention of the acid-etch group was significantly superior (P < 0.01), as was the caries preventive effect (P < 0.01). Subjects tended to report that placement of sealants was easier following enamel preparation with Xeno III (P = 0.085), and in the opinion of the operators, sealants were significantly easier to place when using Xeno III (P = 0.016).
In view of the findings of this investigation, best practice for the placement of sealants remains enamel preparation with acid etch and the use of an intermediate bonding layer.
本研究的目的是：比较使用自酸蚀底漆和传统酸蚀后，放置在咬合面上的窝沟封闭剂（封闭剂）的保留情况；比较使用这两种技术封闭的咬合面的龋齿发生率；并比较这两种技术使用后，受试者和操作者评估的封闭剂放置的难易程度。
本研究采用随机对照试验的形式，在英国国民健康服务体系的社区牙科服务机构和牙科医院诊所进行。七名牙科专业人员招募了60名受试者参与本研究，他们为受试者的下颌恒磨牙对放置封闭剂。在下颌牙弓左右两侧放置封闭剂之前，用于釉质处理的技术是随机的。在下颌牙弓的一侧，使用Xeno III制备咬合面釉质，另一侧使用磷酸酸蚀并结合Prime & Bond。使用不透明的Delton封闭所有表面。受试者对所使用的技术不知情。受试者和操作者在各自的问卷上记录他们对所使用技术的印象。
60名受试者中有46名（77%）在6个月后接受了主要研究者的复查。酸蚀组的封闭剂保留率显著更高（P < 0.01），防龋效果也是如此（P < 0.01）。受试者倾向于报告，使用Xeno III进行釉质处理后放置封闭剂更容易（P = 0.085），并且在操作者看来，使用Xeno III时封闭剂的放置明显更容易（P = 0.016）。
鉴于本调查的结果，放置封闭剂的最佳做法仍然是用酸蚀进行釉质处理并使用中间粘结层。
