Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental School, Islamic Azad University Khorasgan Branch, Isfahan, Iran.
J Appl Oral Sci. 2012 May-Jun;20(3):352-6. doi: 10.1590/s1678-77572012000300010.
The objective of this one-year clinical study was to investigate the effect of two adhesive systems (Adper Single Bond, a two-step etch-and-rinse and Clearfil SE Bond, a two-step self-etch system) on pit-and-fissure sealant retention in newly-erupted teeth. This study compared the success of the sealants in mesial and distopalatal grooves with and without these two adhesive systems.
In a clinical trial, 35 children aged 6-8 years undergoing sealant placement were recruited. This one-year clinical study scored 70 mesial and 70 distopalatal sealants of newly-erupted permanent maxillary first molar, with a split-mouth design. All children received sealant alone in one permanent maxillary molar tooth. Children were randomized into two groups. One group received Self-etch (Se) bond plus sealant and the other group received Single Bond plus sealant in another permanent maxillary molar tooth. Clinical evaluation at 3, 6 and 12 months was performed and the retention was studied in terms of the success and failure.
The success rate of sealant in the distopalatal groove, using SeB at 3, 6 and 12 months was 93.3% (95% CI: 68.0, 99.8), 73.3% (95% CI: 44.9, 92.2) and 66.7% (95% CI: 38.4, 88.2), respectively. It was greater than that of the distopalatal groove in SB group with a success rate of 62.5% (95% CI: 35.4, 84.8), 31.3% (95% CI: 11.8, 58.7) and 31.3% (95% CI: 11.8, 58.7), at the three evaluation periods. The success rate of sealant in the mesial groove using SeB was 86.6% (95% CI: 59.5, 98.3), 53.3% (95% CI: 26.6, 78.7) and 53.3% (95% CI: 26.6, 78.7), while this was 100% (95% CI: 79.4, 100.0), 81.3% (95% CI: 54.4, 96.0) and 81.3% (95% CI: 54.4, 96.0) using SB, at 3, 6 and 12-month evaluation periods.
These results support the use of these two bonding agents in pit-and-fissure sealants under both isolated and contaminated conditions. Further, Se bond seemed to be less sensitive to moisture contamination.
本为期一年的临床研究旨在探讨两种粘结系统(Adper Single Bond,两步酸蚀-冲洗和 Clearfil SE Bond,两步自酸蚀系统)对新萌出牙齿窝沟封闭剂保留的影响。本研究比较了在使用和不使用这两种粘结系统的近中腭沟和远中腭沟窝沟封闭剂的成功率。
在一项临床试验中,招募了 35 名年龄在 6-8 岁的儿童进行封闭剂放置。这项为期一年的临床研究对 70 个新萌出的上颌第一磨牙的近中窝沟和 70 个远中窝沟进行了评分,采用了半口设计。所有儿童在一颗上颌第一磨牙上仅接受封闭剂治疗。儿童被随机分为两组。一组接受自酸蚀粘结剂(Se)加封闭剂,另一组在另一颗上颌第一磨牙上接受 Single Bond 加封闭剂。在 3、6 和 12 个月进行临床评估,并根据成功和失败研究封闭剂的保留情况。
在 3、6 和 12 个月时,使用 SeB 的远中腭沟封闭剂的成功率分别为 93.3%(95%CI:68.0,99.8)、73.3%(95%CI:44.9,92.2)和 66.7%(95%CI:38.4,88.2),高于 SB 组的 62.5%(95%CI:35.4,84.8)、31.3%(95%CI:11.8,58.7)和 31.3%(95%CI:11.8,58.7)。在三个评估期内,使用 SeB 的近中沟封闭剂的成功率分别为 86.6%(95%CI:59.5,98.3)、53.3%(95%CI:26.6,78.7)和 53.3%(95%CI:26.6,78.7),而使用 SB 的成功率分别为 100.0%(95%CI:79.4,100.0)、81.3%(95%CI:54.4,96.0)和 81.3%(95%CI:54.4,96.0)。
这些结果支持在隔离和污染条件下使用这两种粘结剂进行窝沟封闭。此外,Se 粘结剂似乎对水分污染的敏感性较低。