title: [Clinical evaluation of three different materials for fissure sealing after 12 months].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Fissure sealing is a preventive and therapeutic procedure by which the occlusal surface of the fissure system of the teeth is closed with sealing materials for prevention and therapy of initial caries. The fissures of the teeth treated with sealing materials become physiologically clean spots, with no possibility for the developement of caries lesion. The aim of the study was to clinically compare three different fissure sealing materials after one year of use.
  
  
  METHODS
  The study included 73 subjects, 29 (39.7%) male, and 44 (60.3%) female, aged 7-21 years. Sealing was carried out on 150 healthy permenant molars with three different sealing materials divided into three groups: Teethmate F1 (Kuraray) in 48 teeth, Helioseal Clear Chroma (Vivadent) in 52 teeth, and Tetric Flow (Vivadent) in 50 teeth. In each subject, at least two different sealing materials were used. On analysis of the degree of retention and occurrence of secondary caries lesion, modified criteria described by Kilpatrick et al. (1996) were used: 0=no loss, 1=loss of 1/3 of the seal, 2=loss of 2/3 of the seal, 3=complete loss of the seal (more than 2/3 of the material). The criteria for evaluation of the occurrence of secondary caries were: 0=no caries, 1=caries.
  
  
  RESULTS
  After 12 months, complete retention of the Teethmate F1 material was 77.1%, of Helioseal Clear Chroma 76.9%, and of Tetric Flow 84%. There is no statistically significant difference in retention among the sealing materials after 12 months. Tetric Flow showed a better appearance of retention, although not statistically significant (p=0.287). Out of 150 sealed teeth, at 12 months caries was found in only 3 teeth: 2 in the group sealed with Teethmate F1 and one in the group sealed with Helioseal Clear Chroma. In the group sealed with Tetric Flow, no caries was recorded at 12 months.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Comparison of the degree of retention showed flowable composite as a sealing material to yield better results than the classic sealing materials, although the difference was not statistically demonstrated. The low incidence of caries in the fissure system between sealed teeth indicated a good preventive action of the sealing materials. Because of the great supply of flowable composites on the market, differing in the content and consistency, and a great number of various enamel-dentin adhesive systems, there is a need of additional long-term research to determine their clinical justifiability.
authors.affiliation: Zavod za pedodonciju, Stomatoloski fakultet Sveucilista u Zagrebu, Hrvatska. dukic@sfzg.hr
authors.forename: Walter
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Dukić
authors.forename: Domagoj
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Glavina
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D002648:Child; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000627:therapeutic use; D003731:Dental Caries / Q000517:prevention & control; D003750:Dental Fissures / Q000628:therapy*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010895:Pit and Fissure Sealants / Q000627:therapeutic use*
chemical_list: D003188:Composite Resins; D010895:Pit and Fissure Sealants; C099291:teethmate-FTM; C452226:tetric flow composite resin; C059908:Helioseal