Liu Y J, Chang Q, Rong W S, Zhao X L
Department of Preventive Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China (Present address: Arrail-Dental, Beijing 100014, China).
Second Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100101, China.
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2018 Jul 9;53(7):437-442. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2018.07.002.
To evaluate and compare the caries prevention effectiveness of a resin-based sealant and a glass ionomer sealant on permanent first molars in 7- to 9-years-old school children. A randomized controlled, examiner-blinded, 5-year clinical trial was conducted in 19 primary schools in Dalian, Liaoning province. Totally 419 children (with 664 first molars) who had at least one sound permanent first molar with deep fissures or fissures with signs of non-cavitated lesions were recruited and stratified and allocated randomly into three parallel groups. A resin-based sealant was used in Group R (136 children with 219 first molars) and a glass ionomer sealant was used in Group G (130 children with 218 first molars). The third group (Group N, 153 children with 227 first molars) with none of the two sealants applied was served as blank control. Follow-up examinations were conducted at 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 years after sealing in order to assess the retention of the sealants and the incidence of caries occurrence. -square test was adopted to compare the differences of caries incidence among the 3 groups. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) was used to analyze the effective factors of caries incidence. During the 5-year follow-up period, 13.4% (23/172) of the teeth in Group R, 22.5% (40/178) of the teeth in Group G and 34.5% (57/165) of the teeth in Group N were diagnosed as having developed cavitated lesions. And the differences in the incidence of caries among the three groups was statistically significant (0.05). According to GEE, the resin-based sealant and the glass ionomer sealant were found to be the protection factors and the non-cavitated lesion before sealing was found to be the risk factor. The resin-based sealant was found to be the protection factor to the glass ionomer sealant when the blank control group was removed. Both resin-based sealant and glass ionomer sealant could effectively prevent the permanent first molars from the occurrence of carious lesions in 5 years. The resin-based sealant was superior to the glass ionomer sealant in caries prevention.
评估并比较树脂基窝沟封闭剂和玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂对7至9岁学龄儿童恒第一磨牙的防龋效果。在辽宁省大连市的19所小学进行了一项随机对照、检查者盲法的5年临床试验。共招募了419名儿童（664颗第一磨牙），这些儿童至少有一颗有深窝沟或有非龋性病变迹象的完好恒第一磨牙，进行分层并随机分为三个平行组。R组（136名儿童，219颗第一磨牙）使用树脂基窝沟封闭剂，G组（130名儿童，218颗第一磨牙）使用玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂。第三组（N组，153名儿童，227颗第一磨牙）不使用两种窝沟封闭剂作为空白对照。在封闭后0.5、1、2和5年进行随访检查，以评估窝沟封闭剂的保留情况和龋病发生情况。采用卡方检验比较三组龋病发病率的差异。使用广义估计方程（GEE）分析龋病发病率的影响因素。在5年随访期内，R组13.4%（23/172）的牙齿、G组22.5%（40/178）的牙齿和N组34.5%（57/165）的牙齿被诊断为出现龋洞病变。三组龋病发病率的差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。根据GEE分析，树脂基窝沟封闭剂和玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂是保护因素，封闭前的非龋性病变是危险因素。去除空白对照组后，树脂基窝沟封闭剂是优于玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂的保护因素。树脂基窝沟封闭剂和玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂均可在5年内有效预防恒第一磨牙龋病的发生。树脂基窝沟封闭剂在预防龋病方面优于玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂。
