Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37933397›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2023

Microleakage and penetration capability of various pit and fissure sealants upon different sealant application techniques.

Apa Juntavee, Niwut Juntavee, Achara Chaisuntitrakoon, Phillip L Millstein, Behrouz Abedian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors.

Apa JuntaveeDivision of Pediatric Dentistry, Department of Preventive Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Niwut JuntaveeDepartment of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Achara ChaisuntitrakoonResearch Associate, Division of Biomaterials and Pediatric, Faculty of Dentistry, Khon Kaen University, and Dontan Hospital, Thailand.
Phillip L MillsteinDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Harvard University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Behrouz AbedianDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

PMID37933397
PMCPMC10625679

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.