Comparative Evaluation of GIC Based Sealant with Nano-Filled Resin Coating versus Filled Resin Sealant: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective: To evaluate and compare the retention of GIC based sealant with nano-filled resin coating and filled resin sealant at specified time intervals. Study Design: It was a split mouth design in which 248 mandibular first permanent molars were divided into two groups i.e. Group 1 (124): treated with glass ionomer sealant followed by light cured nano-filled resin coating and Group 2 (124): treated with acid etching followed by resin filled sealant. Clinical evaluation was done at 1,3,6,9 and 12 months as per modified categorization by Weiwei Z et al. Data was analyzed using Pearson’s chi-square test to evaluate the success of both treatment procedures (p<0.05). Results: At 12 months, overall retention rate of glass ionomer sealant with nano-filled resin coating was found to be superior (84.7%) as compared to filled resin sealant (74.3%); but no significant difference was noted (p>0.05). Conclusions: Nano-filled resin coating application over glass ionomer sealant provides enhanced longevity and cariostatic benefits; hence, can be used as a viable alternative in place of resin sealants.

Glass ionomer sealant; Nano-filled resin coating; Resin based sealant

1. Cabral RN, Faber J, Otero SAM, Hilgert LA, Leal SC. Retention rates and caries-preventive effects of two different sealant materials: a randomised clinical trial. J Clin Oral Invest 22(9):3171-3177,2018.

2. Prathibha B, Reddy PP, Anjum MS, Monica M, Praveen BH. Sealants revisited: An efficacy battle between the two major types of sealants-A randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Dent Res 16:36-4,2019.

3. Reddy VR, Chowdhary N, Mukunda KS, Kiran NK, Kavyarani BS, Pradeep MS. Retention of resin-based filled and unfilled pit and fissure sealants: A comparative clinical study. Contemp Clin Dent 6(1):S18-S23,2015.

4. Unal M, Oznurhan F, Kapdan A, Durer A. A Comparative Clinical Study of Three Fissure Sealants on Primary Teeth: 24-Month Results. J Clin Paediatr Dent 39(2):113-119, 2015.

5. Antonson SA, Antonson DE, Brener S, Crutchfield J, Larumbe J et al. Twenty-four month clinical evaluation of fissure sealants on partially erupted permanent first molars: glass ionomer versus resin-based sealant. J Am Dent Assoc 143:115-22,2012.

6. Malek S, Hossain M, Gafur MA, Rana MS, Moral MAA .Comparative study of resin sealant and resin modified glass ionomer as pit and fissure sealant. J Bang Sheikh Muji Med Unv 10:21-26,2017.

7. Subramaniam P, Konde S, Mandanna DK. Retention of a resin-based sealant and a glass ionomer used as a fissure sealant: A comparative clinical study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 26:114-20, 2008.

8. Bhat PR, Konde S, Raj SN, Kumar NC. Moisture tolerant resin based sealant: A boon. Contemp Clin Dent 4(3):343-348,2013.

9. Sukumaran VG, Mensudar R. To evaluate the effect of surface coating on three different types of glass ionomer restorations. J Biomed Pharm 8:445-449, 2015.

10. Bonifacio C, Werner A, Cornelis JK. Coating glass-ionomer cements with a nano-filled resin. Acta Odont Scand 70:471–477, 2012.

11. Paschole MAB, Gurgel CV, Rios D, Magalhaese AC, Buzalaf MAF, Machado MADM. Fluoride release profile of a nanofilled resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Braz Dent J 22(4):275-279, 2011.

12. Cecelia CG, Reyes SMG, Silva AP, Munoz CS, Ortiz-Ruiz AJ. Microleakage of conventional light curing resin based fissure sealant and resin modified glass ionomer sealant after application of a fluoride varnish on demineralised enamel. PLos one 13(12):1-10, 2018.

13. Poggio C, Andenna G, Ceci M, Beltrami R, Colombo M, Cucca L. Fluoride release and uptake abilities of different fissure sealants. J Clin Exp Dent 8(3):e284-9, 2016.

14. Prabakar J, John J, Arumugham IM, Kumar RP, Srisakthi D. Comparative evaluation of retention, cariostatic effect and discoloration of conventional and hydrophilic sealants–A single blinded randomized split mouth clinical trial. Contemp Clin Dent 9:S233-9, 2018.

15. Weiwei Z, Chenb Xi, Mingwen F, Mulderd J, Frenckene Jo. Retention rate of four different sealant materials after four years. Oral Health Prev Dent 15:307-314, 2017.

16. Brown LJ, Selwitz RH. The impact of recent changes in the epidemiology of dental caries on guidelines for the use of dental sealants. J Public Health Dent 55:274-291, 1995.

17. Buonocore M. Adhesive sealing of pits and fissures for caries prevention, with use of ultraviolet light. J Am Dent Assoc 80:324–330,1970.

18. Babu G, Mallikarjun S, Wilson B, Premkumar C. Pit and fissure sealants in paediatric dentistry. J Res Dent Sci 5:253-7, 2014.

19. Ulusu T, Odabas ME, Tuzuner T, O’ Baygın, H. The success rates of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant placed by fifth-year undergraduate dental students. Eur J Paediatr Dent 13(2):94-97, 2012.

20. Simonsen RJ. Pit and fissure sealant: review of the literature. Paediatr Dent 24:393-414, 2002.

21. Chen XX, Xing GLIU. Clinical comparison of Fuji VII and a resin sealant in children at high and low risk of caries. Dent Mater 32(3):512–518, 2013.

22. Ulusoy AT, Tunc ES, Bayrak S. Clinical performance of a glass ionomer sealant protected with two different resinbased agents over a 2-year follow-up period. Eur J Paediatr Dent 18(1):10-14, 2017.

23. Arrow P, Riordan PJ. Retention and caries preventive effects of a GIC and a resin based fissure sealant. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 23:282-285, 1995.

24. Antonson SA, Antonson DE, Brener S, Crutchfield J, Larumbe J et al. Twenty-four month clinical evaluation of fissures sealants on partially erupted permanent first molars. J Am Dent Assoc 143(2):115-122, 2012.

25. Mejare I, Mjor IA. Glass ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants: a clinical study. Scand J Dent Res 98:345-350, 1990.

26. Poulsen S, Beiruti N, Sadat N. A comparison of retention and the effect on caries of fissure sealing with a glass-ionomer and a resin- based sealant. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 29(4):298-301, 2001.

27. Messer LB, Calache H, Morgan MV. The retention of pit and fissure sealants placed in primary school children by Dental Health Services, Victoria. Aust Dent J 42:233-9, 1997