Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35626822›Full record

ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Comparative Assessment of Retention and Caries Protective Effectiveness of a Hydrophilic and a Conventional Sealant-A Clinical Trial.

Liana Beresescu, Mariana Pacurar, Alexandru Vlasa, Alexandra Mihaela Stoica, Timea Dako, Blanka Petcu, Daniela Eșian

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The Future of Pediatric Dentistry Is Now.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Liana BeresescuFaculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-0176-1894
Mariana PacurarFaculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.
Alexandru VlasaFaculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.ORCID 0000-0003-3883-0547
Alexandra Mihaela StoicaFaculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.
Timea DakoFaculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-6601-3870
Blanka PetcuFaculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.
Daniela EșianFaculty of Dental Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania.
Universitatea de Medicină, Farmacie, Științe și Tehnologie „George Emil Palade” din Târgu Mureș · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sealants are highly efficient and the most secure method for the prevention of caries lesions from pits and fissures in recently erupted permanent teeth. The aim of this study is to clinically assess and compare the retention and evolution of caries of a moisture-tolerant resin-based sealant with a conventional hydrophobic resin-based sealant. Material and method: We have included in the study 28 children with between 6 and 8 years old. For each child we sealed 4 permanent molars (a total of 112 teeth). The study group was divided into two subgroups: the Embrace Group—consisting of 56 first permanent molars that underwent dental sealing with moisture-tolerant resin-based fissure sealant (Embrace™ WetBond™ Pulpdent, Watertown, MA, USA) and the Helioseal Group—represented by the same number of 56 first permanent molars that were sealed with conventional hydrophobic resin-based sealant (Helioseal F™, Ivoclar Vivadent Schaan, Liechtenstein). The retention and the incidence of new carious lesions of each sealant were assessed clinically at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Results: The 12-month follow-up assessment showed perfect integrity in 50 molars (89.28%) sealed with moisture-tolerant resin-based material (Embrace Group), and in 51 molars (91.07%) with conventional resin-based sealant (Helioseal Group). At the 24-month recall, the retention was maintained in 44 molars (78.57%) in the Embrace Group and in 45 molars (80.35%) in the Helioseal Group, respectively. The follow-up assessments showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.5) between the two materials regarding sealant retention. First evidence of new carious lesions was present at 12 months on two molars sealed with Embrace WetBond and on one molar sealed with Helioseal. At the 24-month evaluation, the prevalence of caries in the Embrace Group was 7.14% (four caries) and 3.56% (two caries) in the Helioseal Group. Moreover, there were no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) between the two materials regarding new caries development at any of the follow-up assessments. Conclusions: Moisture-tolerant resin-based sealant was effective in terms of retention and caries prevention.

Indexed as

conventional resin-based sealantdental decaymoisture-tolerant resin-based sealantretention

Identifiers

PMID35626822
PMCPMC9139836
OpenAlexW4225125013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.