ArticleOral radiology2026
Evaluation of radiopacity in preheated fissure sealants: an in-vitro study.
Article in Oral radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe use of preheated resin-containing materials is of increasing interest in contemporary dentistry. This study aimed to determine the effect of preheating on the radiopacity values of various fissure sealants.
methodsIn this study, four resin-based fissure sealants were utilised. The materials were divided into two groups, one with and one without preheating, with 18 samples in each group. Each sample was prepared in a cylindrical form (6 × 2 mm) using a Teflon mould. For radiopacity assessment, three radiographs were obtained, each containing 18 samples arranged in sets of six, alongside an eight-step aluminium step-wedge with 0.5-mm increments. The object-focal spot distance, kVp, and mAs values were kept constant while taking radiographs. After obtaining the mean gray values of the samples using ImageJ software, the values were converted to equivalent aluminium thickness using CurveExpert Pro software. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), the Tukey multiple comparison test, and the t-test were used for statistical analysis.
resultsA significant difference was found between different fissure sealants (p < 0.05). The radiopacity ranking was found to be Clinpro™ < Helioseal® F Plus < RubyDent® < Fissurit FX in both the preheated and unheated groups. No statistically significant difference was found between preheated and unheated groups of the same material (p > 0.05).
conclusionsThe radiopacity of the fissure sealants varied among manufacturers; however, preheating at 55 °C did not produce any change in radiopacity in any of the materials tested.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41904757What 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.