Dergiler / European Oral Research / 2020 / Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 3

The effect of the Er: YAG laser on the clinical success of hydrophilic fissure sealant: a randomized clinical trial

Sayfa
148–153
Yayın Tarihi
2021-01-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: Etching with the Er:YAG laser, phosphoric acid or a combination of both methods provided similar results for the clinical success of hydrophilic based fissure sealant.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the Er:YAG laser on the clinical success of a hydrophilic fissure sealant over 12 months.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Subject and methods: This study was conducted on 132 permanent first molars from 44 (19 girls and 25 boys) patients aged 7-11 years.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: Etching with the Er:YAG laser, phosphoric acid or a combination of both methods provided similar results for the clinical success of hydrophilic based fissure sealant.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Pit and fissure sealant · UltraSeal XT® hydro™ · Er:YAG laser

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the Er:YAG laser on the clinical success of a hydrophilic fissure sealant over 12 months. Subject and methods: This study was conducted on 132 permanent first molars from 44 (19 girls and 25 boys) patients aged 7-11 years. The teeth were divided into three groups. The first group (Group A-control) of teeth were etched with phosphoric acid, the second group of teeth (Group L) were etched with an Er:YAG laser, and the third group of teeth (Group A+L) were etched with both the Er:YAG laser and phosphoric acid. Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline and at 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-month follow-up visits. The data were analyzed with Pearson chi-square tests, Cochran Q tests and Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: At the end of the 12 months, total retention rates were 72.7%, 59.1%, and 65.9% in the acid group, the laser group and the laser and acid group, respectively. Although there was no statistically significant difference between group retention rates (p>0.05), the lowest retention rate was found in the laser group at the end of the 12-month follow-up period. No new caries were observed in any group during the study period. Conclusion: Etching with the Er:YAG laser, phosphoric acid or a combination of both methods provided similar results for the clinical success of hydrophilic based fissure sealant.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

YİLMAZ, H., KELES, S. (2021). The effect of the Er: YAG laser on the clinical success of hydrophilic fissure sealant: a randomized clinical trial. European Oral Research, Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 3, 148–153. https://ajindex.com/articles/242977

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Peutzfeldt A, Nielsen LA. Bond strength of a sealant to primary and permanent enamel: phosphoric acid versus self-etching adhesive. Pediatr Dent 2004;26(3):240-244
  2. Cueto EI, Buonocore MG Sealing of pits and fissures with an adhesive resin: its use in caries prevention. JADA 1967;75:121–128
  3. Arrow P, Riordan PJ. Retention and caries preventive effects of a GIG and a resin‐based fissure sealant. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1995;23:282–285
  4. Garcia-Godoy F, Gwinnett AJ Penetration of acid solution and gel in occlusal fissures. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;114:809–810
  5. Burrow MF, Makinson O. Pits and fissures: Remnant organic debris after acid etching. J Dent Child 1990; 57:348–351
  6. Ciucchi P, Neuhaus KW, Emerich M, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A. Evaluation of different types of enamel conditioning before application of a fissure sealant. Lasers Med Sci 2015; 30:1-9
  7. Bader C, Krejci I. Indications and limitations of Er:YAG laser applications in dentistry. Am J Dent 2006;19:178-186
  8. Oho T, Morioka T. A Possible Mechanism of Acquired Acid Resistance of Human Dental Enamel by Laser Irradiation. Caries Res 1990;24:86–92
  9. Khogli AE, Cauwels R, Vercruysse C, Verbeeck R, Martens L. Microleakage and penetration of a hydrophilic sealant and a conventional resin-based sealant as a function of preparation techniques: A laboratory study. Int J Paediatr Dent 2013;23:13–22
  10. Brinker SP. Preventing carious lesions: Clinical steps for applying a newly introduced hydrophilic sealant. Dent Today 2013;32:82-83
  11. Schlueter N, Klimek J, Ganss C. Efficacy of a moisture-tolerant material for fissure sealing: A prospective randomised clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:711-716
  12. Askarizadeh N, Hesmat H, Zangeneh N. One-Year Clinical Success of Embrace Hydrophilic and Helioseal-F Hydrophobic Sealants in Permanent First Molars: A Clinical Trial. J Tehran 2017;14:92–99
  13. Bhatia MR, Patel AR, Shirol DD. Evaluation of two resin based fissure sealants: a comparative clinical study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2012;30:227-230
  14. Karaman E, Yazici AR, Baseren M. Comparison of acid versus laser etching on the clinical performance of a fissure sealant: 24-month results. Oper Dent 2013;38:151–158
  15. Simonsen RJ. Retention and effectivenessof dental sealant after 15 years. J Am Dent Assoc 1991;122:34-42
  16. Zhang Y, Wang Y, Chen Y, Zhang Q, Zou J. The clinical effects of laser preparation of tooth surfaces for fissure sealants placement: a systematic review