ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2023
Microleakage and penetration capability of various pit and fissure sealants upon different sealant application techniques.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microleakage, penetration depth, and fluoride release of Embrace Wetbond, Denuseal, and Helioseal F Plus pit and fissure sealants: a comparative in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- The effects of material type, salivary contamination and adhesive application on the performance of pit and fissure sealants.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparison of Nano-silver Fluoride and Silver Diamine Fluoride as Pretreatment Agents for Pit-and-fissure Sealants in Primary Teeth.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Comparative study on the microleakage performance of different pit and fissure sealants.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- In Vitro Microleakage Comparison of Three Pit-and-Fissure Sealant Protocols: Self-Etch Sealant with and Without Separate Adhesive Versus Conventional Resin-Based Sealants.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Impact of Novel Pit and Fissure Sealant Infused with Silver Nanoparticles in Comparison with Conventional Pit and Fissure Sealant in both Primary and Permanent Teeth: An SEM and Stereomicroscope Study.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Micro-CT Assessment of Heat and Vibration Effect on Sealant Penetration in Different Fissure Types.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Techniques for Pit and Fissure Sealant Application to Reduce Microleakage.Cureus · 2024Article
- Effect of two different bonding agents on the microleakage used for fluoride releasing pit and fissure sealant.Bioinformation · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sealant application that yields superior marginal adaptation and deeper fissure penetration potentially improves success in preventive and restorative dentistry. This study evaluated the amount of in-vitro microleakage and penetration capabilities of different pit-fissure sealants as the effect of different application techniques. Material and Methods: 160 freshly extracted human sound premolars, assigned as suitable for sealant application, selected and allocated randomly into 8 groups (n=20 teeth/group) and applied with different sealants including Embrace-Wetbond® (E), UltraSeal XT® (U), Clinpro™ (CL), Helioseal® (H), using either conventional (C) or induced application (I). The sealed teeth were thermocycling for 500 cycles between 5°C and 55°C with 30 seconds dwelling time. The tooth was coated with 2 layers of nail varnish, leaving 1 mm around the sealant margin, then immersed in 5% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. Subsequently, 2 pieces were segmented vertically in a buccolingual direction, yielding 4 surfaces/tooth for determination of microleakage and penetration proportion of sealant with polarized light microscopy (PLM) and image-J software. ANOVA and Bonferroni multiple comparisons were determined for significant differences (α=0.05). Sealant adaptability was detected using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Results: The highest microleakage was observed for EC, followed by CLC, HC, UC, CLI, HI, EI, and UI. The highest penetration was seen in UI, followed by HI, CLI, CLC, UC, HC, EI, and EC. ANOVA indicated significant differences in microleakage and penetration on the type of sealant and application method ( Conclusions: Microleakage and penetration capabilities of sealant are greatly affected by the types of sealant and the method by which the sealant is applied. U-sealant exhibited less microleakage and better penetration capability than others. I-application reduced microleakage, promoting enhanced penetration and adaptation, is the recommended sealant application.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.