ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2024
Comparative evaluation of microleakage and penetration depth of ACP containing pit and fissure sealant and flowable composite - An
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of microleakage and remineralization potential of a fissure sealant containing microcapsules on artificial enamel lesions: with and without adhesive application.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- 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
- Comparative analysis of different pit and fissure sealants' marginal sealing abilities.Bioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The present Material and Methods: Sixty extracted non-carious premolars were categorized into four groups of 15 samples each. Sealant was applied after the Occlusal surfaces of the sample teeth were prophylactically treated with pumice slurry. Later, the teeth were thermocycled and immersed in methylene blue for a period of 24 hours. The samples were buccolingually sectioned and analysed under a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis was carried out to compare the microleakage and depth of penetration. Results: Flowable nanocomposite gave comparable results with that of the sealant in terms of microleakage. Nano-hybrid flowable composite performed better with respect to depth of penetration between tested materials with the difference being statistically significant. Conclusions: Flowable nanocomposite can be considered as a promising substitute for sealing fissures and thus can be endorsed to caries susceptible pediatric patients.
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.