title: [Comparative studies on fissure sealing: composite versus Cermet cement].
abstract: Fifty two molars sealed with either composite or Cermet cement were compared. The composite sealant was applied after enamel etching using a rubber dam. Before sealing with Cermet cement the enamel was only cleaned with pumice powder and sodium hypochlorie and the material was applied without enamel etching. After an average follow-up of 1.6 years composite sealants proved to be significantly more reliable. Cermet cement sealings showed defects more frequently.
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Hickel
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Voss
mesh_terms: D016722:Cermet Cements; D003188:Composite Resins; D003722:Dental Alloys; D003738:Dental Cements; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D006801:Humans; D010895:Pit and Fissure Sealants; D012834:Silver
chemical_list: D016722:Cermet Cements; D003188:Composite Resins; D003722:Dental Alloys; D003738:Dental Cements; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D010895:Pit and Fissure Sealants; D012834:Silver
vernacular_title: Vergleichende Untersuchung über Fissurenversiegelung: Komposit versus Cermet-Zement.