Microleakage of conventional light-cure resin-based fissure sealant and resin-modified glass ionomer sealant after application of a fluoride varnish on demineralized enamel.

BACKGROUND

International guidelines on the prevention of caries recommend sealing of the pits and fissures of the permanent molars. There is no evidence on which type of material is most effective on demineralized enamel.

AIM

To evaluate the microleakage of a conventional light-cured, resin-based fissure sealant (LCRBS), GrandiO Seal, and a resin-modified glass ionomer sealant (RMGIS), Vitremer, after application of a fluoride varnish, Bifluorid 12, on demineralized enamel.

DESIGN

80 human third molars were divided into eight groups. The groups combined the three study factors (1) type of enamel (intact or demineralized); (2) enamel non-varnished or varnished with Biflourid12; and (3) type of sealant (GrandiO Seal or Vitremer). The percentage of microleakage after thermocycling was measured using imaging analysis software. The Kruskal-Wallis plus Dunn tests were used to compare differences in microleakage in the different groups.

RESULTS

The lowest microleakage was in the unvarnished groups, and was the same for GrandiO Seal and Vitremer. When varnish was applied, microleakage was greater in demineralized enamel than in intact enamel for both LCRBS and RMGIS.

CONCLUSION

The application of fluoride varnish on demineralized enamel increases the microleakage of both GrandiO Seal and Vitremer.