Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회지)

Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

In Vitro Evaluation of Microleakage and Penetration of Hydrophilic Sealants Applied on Dry and Moist Enamel

법랑질 수분 처리에 따른 친수성 치면열구전색제의 미세누출과 열구 침투도 평가

  • Ku, Jaewon (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Lee, Jewoo (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Ra, Jiyoung (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Wonkwang University)
  • 구재원 (원광대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 이제우 (원광대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 라지영 (원광대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실)
  • Received : 2016.09.08
  • Accepted : 2016.10.27
  • Published : 2017.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the microleakage and penetration of two hydrophilic sealants, Embrace $Wetbond^{TM}$ and Ultraseal $XT^{(R)}$ $hydro^{TM}$, when applied on dry and moist enamel, as compared to a conventionally used hydrophobic sealant, $Clinpro^{TM}$. A total of 60 sound human third molars were randomly divided into 5 groups according to the enamel moisture control and the sealant material used. After sealant application, the teeth were thermocycled and immersed in 1% methylene blue dye. Subsequently, the teeth were sectioned twice and the sections were examined using an optical microscope and image analysis software. Application of Embrace $Wetbond^{TM}$ on either dry or moist enamel resulted in more microleakage than $Clinpro^{TM}$. Application of Ultraseal $XT^{(R)}$ $hydro^{TM}$ on dry enamel showed a similar level of microleakage to $Clinpro^{TM}$, but application on moist enamel resulted in more microleakage. There were no significant differences between the groups in penetration. In conclusion, application of hydrophilic sealants on moist enamel did not improve the sealing ability and showed lower sealing ability than that of $Clinpro^{TM}$ applied on dry enamel.

이 연구의 목적은 2종의 친수성 치면열구전색제를 건조한 법랑질과 습한 법랑질에 적용하였을 때의 미세누출과 열구 침투도를 평가하는 것으로, 기존의 소수성 전색제인 $Clinpro^{TM}$와 비교하였다. 건전하고 우식이 없는 제3대구치 60개를 법랑질 수분 처리 방법과 전색제 종류에 따라 12개씩 다섯 군으로 나누었다. 전색제 적용 후 치아들을 열순환 시킨 뒤 1% 메틸렌블루 용액에 담갔다. 그리고 치아들을 두 번씩 절단한 뒤 절단면들을 광학 현미경과 이미지 분석 프로그램을 이용해 관찰하였다. Embrace $Wetbond^{TM}$는 건조한 표면과 습한 표면 모두에서 $Clinpro^{TM}$보다 많은 미세누출을 나타냈다. Ultraseal $XT^{(R)}$ $hydro^{TM}$는 건조한 표면에서는 $Clinpro^{TM}$와 유사한 미세누출을 보였으나, 습한 표면에서는 많은 미세누출을 보였다. 열구 침투도는 모든 군에서 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 없었다. 결론적으로 친수성 전색제들을 습한 법랑질에 적용했을 때 변연 봉쇄성이 향상되지 않았으며, 건조한 표면에 적용한 $Clinpro^{TM}$보다 낮은 변연 봉쇄성이 관찰되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Simonsen RJ : Pit and fissure sealant: review of the literature. Pediatr Dent, 24:393-414, 2002.
  2. Beauchamp J, Caufield PW, Simonsen R, et al. : Evidencebased clinical recommendation for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants: a report of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. Dent Clin North Am, 53:131-147, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2008.09.003
  3. Stephen KW : A four-year fissure sealing study in fluoridated and non-fluoridated Galloway. Health Bull (Edinb), 36:138-145, 1978.
  4. Charbeneau GT, Dennison JB : Clinical success and potential failure after single application of a pit and fissure sealant: a four-year report. J Am Dent Assoc, 98:559-564, 1979. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1979.0112
  5. Bravo M, Garcia-Anllo I, Baca P, Llodra JC : A 48-month survival analysis comparing sealant (Delton) with fluoride varnish (Duraphat) in 6- to 8-year-old children. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 25:247-250, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.1997.tb00935.x
  6. Songpaisan Y, Bratthall D, Phantumvanit P, Somridhivej Y : Effect of glass ionomer cement, resin-based pit and fissure sealant and HF application on occlusal caries in developing country field trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 23:25-29, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.1995.tb00193.x
  7. Poulsen S, Beiruti N, Sadat N : A comparison of retention and the effect on caries of fissure sealing with a glassionomer and a resin-based sealant. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 29:298-301, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2001.290409.x
  8. Nakabayashi N, Kojima K, Masuhara E : The promotion of adhesion by the infiltration of monomers into tooth substrate. J Biomed Mater Res, 16:265-273, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820160307
  9. Walls AW, Lee J, McCabe JF : The bonding of composite resin to moist enamel. Br Dent J, 191:148-150, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4801124
  10. Furuse AY, Cunha LF, Mondelli J, et al. : Enamel wetness effects on bond strength using different adhesive systems. Oper Dent, 36:274-280, 2011. https://doi.org/10.2341/10-163-L
  11. Strassler HE, O'Donnell JP : A unique moisture-tolerant, resin-based pit and fissure sealant: clinical technique and research results. Inside Dentistry, 4:108-110, 2008.
  12. Brinker SP : Preventing carious lesions. Clinical steps for applying a newly introduced hydrophilic sealant. Dent Today, 32:82-83, 2013.
  13. Prabhakar AR, Murthy SA, Sugandhan S : Comparative evaluation of the length of resin tags, viscosity and microleakage of pit and fissure sealants - an in vitro scanning electron microscope study. Contemp Clin Dent, 2:324-330, 2011. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-237X.91797
  14. Eliades A, Birpou E, Eliades T, Eliades G : Self-adhesive restoratives as pit and fissure sealants: a comparative laboratory study. Dent Mater, 29:752-762, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.04.005
  15. Guclu ZA, Donmez N, Coleman NJ, et al. : The impact of Er:YAG laser enamel conditioning on the microleakage of a new hydrophilic sealant-Ultraseal $XT^{(R)}$ $hydro^{TM}$. Lasers Med Sci, 31:705-711, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-016-1878-y
  16. Guclu ZA, Donmez N, Hurt AP, Coleman NJ : Characterisation and microleakage of a new hydrophilic fissure sealant - Ultraseal $XT^{(R)}$ $hydro^{TM}$. J Appl Oral Sci, 24:344-351, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-775720160010
  17. Im E, Lee SH, Lee NY : A study of microleakage and penetration ability of a pit and fissure sealant applied on carious fissures. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent, 37:345-351, 2010.
  18. Celiberti P, Lussi A : Penetration ability and microleakage of a fissure sealant applied on artificial and natural enamel fissure caries. J Dent, 35:59-67, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2006.04.007
  19. Ratnaditya A, Kumar MGM, Kopuri RK, et al. : Clinical evaluation of retention in hydrophobic and hydrophilic pit and fissure sealants- a two year follow-up study. J Young Pharm, 7:171-179, 2015. https://doi.org/10.5530/jyp.2015.3.6
  20. Khatri SG, Samuel SR, Madan K, et al. : Retention of moisture-tolerant and conventional resin-based sealant in sixto nine- year-old children. Pediatr Dent, 37:366-370, 2015.
  21. Schlueter N, Klimek J, Ganss C : Efficacy of a moisture-tolerant material for fissure sealing: a prospective randomised clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig, 17:711-716, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0740-2
  22. Khogli AE, Cauwels R, Martens L, et al. : Microleakage and penetration of a hydrophilic sealant and a conventional resin-based sealant as a function of preparation techniques: a laboratory study. Int J Paediatr Dent, 23:13-22, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2011.01218.x
  23. Beslot-Neveu A, Courson F, Ruse ND : Physico-chemical approach to pit and fissure sealant infiltration and spreading mechanisms. Pediatr Dent, 34:57-61, 2012.
  24. Littlewood SJ, Mitchell L, Wood DJ, et al. : Investigation of a hydrophilic primer for orthodontic bonding: an in vitro study. J Orthod, 27:181-186, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/27.2.181
  25. Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Klersy C, et al. : Effect of water and saliva contamination on shear bond strength of brackets bonded with conventional, hydrophilic, and self-etching primers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 123:633-640, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00198-7
  26. Grandhi RK, Combe EC, Speidel TM : Shear bond strength of stainless orthodontic brackets with a moisture-insensitive primer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 119:251-255, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.110988
  27. Ito S, Hashimoto M, Pashley DH, et al. : Effects of resin hydrophilicity on water sorption and changes in modulus of elasticity. Biomaterials, 26:6449-6459, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.04.052
  28. Yiu CK, King NM, Tay FR, et al. : Effect of resin hydrophilicity and temperature on water sorption of dental adhesive resins. Biomaterials, 27:1695-1703, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.09.037
  29. Ishiyama C, Sakuma T, Higo Y, et al. : Effects of humidity on environmental stress cracking behavior in poly(methyl methacrylate). J Polym Sci B: Polym Phys, 40:1-9, 2002.
  30. Nemeth BR, Whiltshire WA, Lavelle CL : Shear/peel bond strength of orthodontic attachment to moist and dry enamel. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 129:396-401, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.12.017
  31. Hatibovic-Kofman S, Butler SA, Sadek H : Microleakage of three sealants following conventional, bur, and air-abrasion preparation of pits and fissures. Int J Paediatr Dent, 11:409-416, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0960-7439.2001.00303.x

Cited by

  1. Evaluation of Microtensile Bond Strength of Sealant Depending on the Duration of Etching and the Use of Bonding Agent vol.45, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5933/JKAPD.2018.45.3.299