| |
|
|
| Year : 2012 | Volume
: 23
| Issue : 2 | Page : 247-250 |
|
| In vitro study of microleakage of different techniques of surface preparation used in pits and fissures |
|
|
Shahrzad Javadi Nejad1, Mohamad Razavi2, Reza Birang3, Mohamad Atefat1
1 Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental School, Islamic Azad University - Khorasgan Branch, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Oral Pathology, Dental School, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3 Department of Periodontology, Dental School, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Click here for correspondence address and email
| Date of Submission | 31-May-2010 |
| Date of Decision | 28-Jul-2010 |
| Date of Acceptance | 22-Oct-2010 |
| Date of Web Publication | 3-Sep-2012 |
|
|
 |
|
 Abstract | | |
Objective : The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of different techniques of surface preparation on the microleakage of a sealant applied with traditional acid etching and self-etched bonding agent.
Study Design : A total of 60 extracted third molars were randomly assigned into six groups (n = 10/each). The occlusal surfaces were sealed with a sealant (Clinpro) after one of the following pretreatments: (1) phosphoric acid etching; (2) Prompt L-Pop; (3) laser + etching; (4) laser + Prompt L-Pop; (5) air abrasion + etching; (6) air abrasion + Prompt L-Pop. The specimens were immersed in a 0.5% basic fuchsin solution. Buccolingual cuts parallel to the long axis of the tooth were made. The surfaces were scored 0--2 for extent of microleakage using a microscope and the data were analyzed statistically.
Results : The poorest results were obtained with laser + Prompt L-Pop which showed a greater number of specimens with microleakage (80%). Air abrasion surface preparation + phosphoric acid etching showed less microleakage than the other groups (40%). Kruskal--Wallis and t-tests revealed no significant difference in microleakage between six groups.
Conclusion : The self-etching adhesive studied seems an attractive alternative to the acid-etch technique for sealant application in young children where simplifications in the clinical procedure are warranted. No significant difference was noted between the different types of enamel preparation before fissure sealant. Keywords: Adhesive system, air abrasion, dental sealant, microleakage
How to cite this article:
Nejad SJ, Razavi M, Birang R, Atefat M. In vitro study of microleakage of different techniques of surface preparation used in pits and fissures. Indian J Dent Res 2012;23:247-50 |
How to cite this URL:
Nejad SJ, Razavi M, Birang R, Atefat M. In vitro study of microleakage of different techniques of surface preparation used in pits and fissures. Indian J Dent Res [serial online] 2012 [cited 2023 Jun 6];23:247-50. Available from: https://www.ijdr.in/text.asp?2012/23/2/247/100435 |
Pit and fissure sealants are a safe and effective preventive treatment for caries. [1],[2]
The success of pit and fissure sealants over long-time spans depends on an effective marginal seal, retention, and integrity. Sealant microleakage is a very undesirable incident that suggests failure of the adhesion process. [3]
To improve sealant retention several methods of preparing fissures such as pumice prophylaxis, enameloplasty, bonding agents, laser, and air abrasion have been advocated by investigators. [4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15]
Several studies have focused on investigating the efficiency of erbium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser on the surface pretreatment. [16],[17],[18],[19]
The ability of the Er:YAG laser to efficiently ablate dental tissues is ascribed to its 2.94-mm wavelength emission, which is coincident with the main absorption band of water (~3.0 mm) and OH- groups in hydroxyapatite (~2.8 mm). [17],[19],[20]
The incident radiation is highly absorbed by water molecules in the dental hard structures causing rapid heating and water evaporation. [16],[19],[21]
The resulting high stream pressure leads to the occurrence of successive microexplosions with ejection of tissue particles, [19],[21],[22] which are characteristic of the ablation process and establish the microcrater-like appearance of lased surfaces. [23],[24]
Furthermore, the Er:YAG laser has been considered a promising substitute for preventive dentistry because of its ability to increase fluoride uptake [25] and decrease acid dissolution, thus creating a surface more resistant to acid dissolution. [26] Therefore, it could be assumed that if the sealant falls out from a laser-pretreated tooth, the surface would be more resistant to acid attack. [27]
Another studies focused on use of air abrasion for enamel conditioning. Air abrasion removes tooth structure using a stream of aluminum oxide particles generated from compressed air or bottled carbon dioxide or nitrogen gas. The abrasive particles strike the tooth with high velocity and remove small amounts of tooth structure. Efficiency of removal is relative to the hardness of the tissue or material being removed and the operating parameters of the air abrasion device. [28] In addition air abrasion has been shown to enhance enamel bonding. [29]
A limited number of studies have compared the effectiveness of use of bonding agents, air abrasion, and laser pretreatment of fissures. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of two techniques of surface preparation, air-abrasion, and Er:YAG laser irradiation on the microleakage of a fissure sealant. In addition, each of these two groups was further divided into two additional groups to compare self-etched bonding with phosphoric acid etching.
| Materials and Methods | |  |
A total of 60 freshly extracted sound human third molars were cleaned with pumice and brush in low-speed hand piece and washed with water and were randomly assigned into six groups (n = 10/each). The occlusal surfaces were sealed with a fissure sealant material Clinpro (3M/ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) after one of the following pretreatments:
Group 1: phosphoric acid etching only; group 2: Prompt L-Pop only; group 3: laser surface preparation + phosphoric acid etching; group 4: laser surface preparation + Prompt L-Pop; (group 5) air abrasion surface preparation +phosphoric acid etching; (group 6) air abrasion surface preparation + Prompt L-Pop.
Group 1: The pits and fissures were etched with 37% phosphoric acid (3M/ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) for 15 seconds, rinsed with water for 20 seconds, and air dried for 30 seconds
Group 2: The adhesive system Prompt L-Pop (3M/ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) was used according to the manufacturer's instructions. The L-Pop delivery system allows for easier flow of material from one chamber to the next. When the material moves from the red chamber to the yellow chamber, a new indentation in the yellow chamber pops up to show that the material has properly transferred. Adhesive brushed onto the surface to be sealed; scrubbed for 15 seconds applying moderate pressure. A gentle stream of air was used to thoroughly dry the adhesive to a thin film and light cured for 10 seconds.
Group 3: Enamel was irradiated with a pulsed Er:YAG laser (HT Fidelis, Fotona, Ljubljana, SLOVENIA,) at a wavelength of 2.94 μm, a pulse duration of 250-500 μs under water cooling (5 ml/min). The output power and repetition rate of this equipment was 120 mJ and 4 Hz, respectively. The hand piece was held perpendicular to the enamel surface at a distance of 1 mm. [30] Then the pits and fissures were etched with 37% phosphoric acid ((3M/ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA), for 15 seconds, rinsed with water for 20 seconds, and air dried for 30 seconds.
Group 4: Enamel was irradiated with a pulsed Er:YAG laser. Then the Prompt L-Pop was used according to the manufacturer's instructions as mentioned for group 2.
Group 5; The enamel surface air abraded with a Prophy-Mate Air Powered Tooth Polishing System (NSK, Japan) with stream of Prophy-Mate Cleaning Powder (sodium bicarbonate with lemon flavor). The position of nozzle was hold at 60° angle with 3-5 mm away from the tooth surface. The air was taken from the compressed air available in the hospital facilities. Then the pits and fissures were etched with 37% phosphoric acid for 15 seconds, rinsed with water for 20 seconds, and air dried for 30 seconds
Group 6: The enamel surface air abraded with a Prophy-Mate Air Powered Tooth Polishing System with stream of Prophy-Mate Cleaning Powder. Prompt L-Pop was used according to the manufacturer's instructions as mentioned for group 2.
All specimens were thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5°C and 55°C, with a 30-second dwell time. Following thermocycling, the root apexes of the teeth were sealed with wax and the teeth were coated with two layers of nail polish, except for the restorations and leaving exposed a 1.5-mm window around the sealant margins. The samples were and immersed in a 0.5% basic fuchsin solution. They were then thoroughly rinsed in tap water. Next, the teeth were embedded in self-curing acrylic resin. Buccolingual cuts parallel to the long axis of the tooth were made. After the above procedures, the length of dye penetration at the sealant/tooth interface was examined under a stereomicroscope with 40× magnification and a ranked scale was used to score dye penetration: 0= no dye penetration; 1= dye penetration less than 500 micro meters; 2= dye penetration more than 500 μm. The Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare the groups for statistically significant differences at 5% significance level.
| Results | | |
Microleakage scores for all groups are presented in [Table 1].
Higher microleakage values were found in group 4, where laser and self-etch bonding had been used, and lower values were found in group 5 where air abrasion and acid etching had been used. Microleakage showed no significant differences among all treatment groups (P>0.05). No statistically significant differences (P>0.05) were found between acid etching and bonding groups but microleakage was less in all groups when enamel was acid etched.
| Discussion | | |
Considering that the microretentive pattern obtained after Er:YAG laser and air abrasion has been described as suitable for adhesion [16],[23],[29] the current study assessed the microleakage of a sealant after such surface preparations.
The hypothesis that Er:YAG laser and air abrasion combined with the conventional treatment with acid would increase the surface adhesion could not be confirmed in the present research because groups that received laser irradiation and air abrasion were not more effective than those pretreated with phosphoric acid and self-etching primer solely.
The results of study by Mazzoleni s. showed that the air abrasion technique is able to guarantee a reliable seal of occlusal surfaces. Hatibovic-Kofman et al. concluded that air abrasion with acid etch showed significantly less microleakage than either bur with acid etch or acid etch alone which is contrary to our finding. [4],[5]
This difference may be explained, in part, by the differences in sealant material used and by the different characteristics of the laser and air abrasion used.
The findings of several studies have shown that no significant difference was noted between mechanical conditioning of the laser or air abrasion when etching was performed. Borsatto, Lupi-Pégurier, Blackwood, Zyskind, and Manhart found that complementing either air abrasion or Er:YAG laser irradiation with a subsequent acid conditioning did not lessen microleakage at the enamel-sealant interface when compared with an acid-etched group. [6],[7],[8],[9],[10] These reports are also in agreement with the results of our study.
The second part of the study evaluated the microleakage of two different methods: total etch (phosphoric acid) and self-etching primer with Prompt. Two studies assessed marginal microleakage of prompt and are in agreement of our study: Asselin et al., believed that self-etching adhesive (prompt) seems to be an attractive alternative to the acid etch and adhesive technique for sealant application in young children, since it would simplify the procedure. [11] Gillet showed that self-etching primer prompt is very efficient versus phosphoric acid in obturating the fissures of noncarious bicuspids. [12]
Camacho, Castro, and Al-Sarheed assessed bond strength of Prompt-L-Pop and showed that the use of bonding agent improves the mean enamel shear bond strength of fissure sealants. [13],[14],[15]
The present study had some limitations. The dye material used was a 0.5% solution of basic fuchsin. Using other dye solutions (e.g. 0.2% rhodamine, 1% methylene blue or 50% silver nitrate) could have produced different results. In addition the laser and air abrasion were evaluated only with respect to marginal leakage. It may be that different environmental situations for teeth may influence the microleakage of the sealant placed using either technique. Furthermore, other factors must be considered when evaluating both techniques, such as long-term retention, the integrity of the sealant, or the shear strength of the sealant.
In addition further studies with other laser parameters and long-term clinical trials are required to determine which protocol is preferred to improve the mechanism of adhesion to the laser-irradiated surface before this technology becomes routine in dental practice.
| Conclusion | | |
The self-etching adhesive studied seems an attractive alternative to the acid-etch technique for sealant application in young children where simplifications in the clinical procedure are warranted. Overall, Er:YAG laser and air abrasion was not able to increase the effectiveness of conventional acid etching of enamel in the bond of sealants.
| References | | |
| 1. | Simonsen RJ. Retention and effectiveness of a single application of white sealant after 10 years. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;115:31-6. 
[PUBMED] |
| 2. | Swift EJ Jr. The effect of sealants on dental caries: A review. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;116:700-4.
[PUBMED] |
| 3. | Gomes-Silva JM, Torres CP, Contente MM, Oliveira MA, Palma-Dibb RG, Borsatto MC. Bond strength of a pit-and-fissure sealant associated to etch-and-rinse and self-etching adhesive systems to saliva-contaminated enamel: Individual vs. simultaneous light curing. Braz Dent J 2008;19:341-7.
|
| 4. | Mazzoleni S, De Francesco M, Perazzolo D, Favero L, Bressan E, Ferro R, et al. Comparative evaluation of different techniques of surface preparation for occlusal sealing. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2007;8:119-23.
[PUBMED] |
| 5. | Hatibovic-Kofman S, Butler SA, Sadek H. Microleakage of three sealants following conventional, bur, and air-abrasion preparation of pits and fissures. Int J Paediatr Dent 2001;11:409-16.
[PUBMED] |
| 6. | Borsatto MC, Corona SA, Dibb RG, Ramos RP, Pécora JD. Microleakage of a resin sealant after acid-etching, Er:YAG laser irradiation and air-abrasion of pits and fissures. J Clin Laser Med Surg 2001;19:83-7.
|
| 7. | Lupi-Pégurier L, Muller-Bolla M, Bertrand MF, Fradet T, Bolla M. Microleakage of a pit-and-fissure sealant: Effect of air-abrasion compared with classical enamel preparations. J Adhes Dent 2004;6:43-8.
|
| 8. | Blackwood JA, Dilley DC, Roberts MW, Swift EJ Jr. Evaluation of pumice, fissure enameloplasty and air abrasion on sealant microleakage. Pediatr Dent 2002;24:199-203.
|
| 9. | Zyskind D, Zyskind K, Hirschfeld Z, Fuks AB. Effect of etching on leakage of sealants placed after air abrasion. Pediatr Dent 1998;20:25-7.
|
| 10. | Manhart J, Huth KC, Chen HY, Hickel R. Influence of the pretreatment of occlusal pits and fissures on the retention of a fissure sealant. Am J Dent 2004;17:12-8.
|
| 11. | Asselin ME, Fortin D, Sitbon Y, Rompré PH. Marginal microleakage of a sealant applied to permanent enamel: Evaluation of 3 application protocols. Pediatr Dent 2008;30:29-33.
|
| 12. | Gillet D, Nancy J, Dupuis V, Dorignac G .Microleakage and penetration depth of three types of materials in fissure sealant: self-etching primer vs etching: An in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2002;26:175-8.
|
| 13. | Castro LC, Galvão AC. Comparison of three different preparation methods in the improvement of sealant retention. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2004;28:249-52.
|
| 14. | Al-Sarheed M. Bond strength of 4 sealants using conventional etch and a self-etching primer. J Dent Child (Chic) 2006;73:37-41
|
| 15. | Al-Sarheed MA. Evaluation of shear bond strength and SEM observation of all- in-one self-etching primer used for bonding of fissure sealants. J Contemp Dent Pract 2006;7:9-16.
|
| 16. | Armengol V, Jean A, Rohanizadeh R, Hamel H. Scanning electron microscopic analysis of diseased and healthy dental hard tissues after Er: YAG laser irradiation: In vitro study. J Endod 1999;25:543-6.
|
| 17. | Apel C, Franzen R, Meister J, Sarrafzadegan H, Thelen S, Gutknecht N. Influence of the pulse duration of an Er: YAG laser system on the ablation threshold of dental enamel. Lasers Med Sci 2002;17:253-7.
|
| 18. | Trajtenberg CP, Pereira PN, Powers JM. Resin bond strength and micromorphology of human teeth prepared with an Erbium: YAG laser. Am J Den 2004;17:331-6.
|
| 19. | Hibst R, Keller U. Experimental studies of the application of the Er: YAG laser on dental hard substances: Measurement of ablation rate. Lasers Surg Med 1989;9:338-44.
|
| 20. | Martinez-Insua A, Dominguez LS, Rivera FG, Santana-Penin UA. Differences in bonding to acid etched or Er: YAG laser treated enamel and dentin surfaces. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:280-8.
|
| 21. | Hossain M, Nakamura Y, Yamada Y, Kimura Y, Nakamura G, Matsumoto K. Ablation depths and morphological changes in human enamel and dentin after Er: YAG laser irradiation with or without water. J Clin Laser Med Surg 1999;17:105-9.
|
| 22. | Ying D, Chuah GK, Hsu CY. Effect of Er: YAG laser and organic matrix on porosity changes in human enamel. J Dent 2004;32:41-6.
|
| 23. | Bader C, Krejci I. Indications and limitations of Er: YAG laser applications in dentistry. Am J Dent 2006;19:178-86.
|
| 24. | Dunn WJ, Davis JT, Bush AC. Shear bond strength and SEM evaluation of composite bonded to Er: YAG laser prepared dentin and enamel. Dent Mater 2005;21:616-24.
|
| 25. | Bevilacqua FM, Zezell DM, Magnani R, da Ana PA, Eduardo Cde P. Fluoride uptake and acid resistance of enamel irradiated with Er: YAG laser. Lasers Med Sci 2008;23:141-7.
|
| 26. | Ceballos L, Toledano M, Osorio R, García-Godoy F, Flaitz C, Hicks J. Er: YAG laser pretreatment effect on in vitro secondary caries formation around composite restorations. Am J Dent 2001;14:46-9.
|
| 27. | Lepri TP, Souza-Gabriel AE, Atoui JA, Palma-Dibb RG, Pécora JD, Milori Corona SA. Shear bond strength of a sealant to contaminated-enamel surface: Influence of erbium: Yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser pretreatment. J Esthet Restor Dent 2008;20:386-92.
|
| 28. | White JM, Eakle WS. Rationale and treatment approach in minimally invasive dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 2000;131(Suppl):13S-9S.
|
| 29. | Sengun A, Orucoglu H, Ipekdal I, Ozer F Adhesion of two bonding systems to air-abraded or bur-abraded human enamel surfaces. Eur J Dent 2008;2:167-75
|
| 30. | Youssef MN, Youssef FA, Souza-Zaroni WC, Turbino ML, Vieira MM. Effect of enamel preparation method on in vitro marginal microleakage of a flowable composite used as pit and fissure sealant. Int J Paediatr Dent 2006;16:342-7
|
Correspondence Address:
Shahrzad Javadi Nejad
Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental School, Islamic Azad University - Khorasgan Branch, Isfahan
Iran
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.100435
[Table 1] |
|
| This article has been cited by | | 1 |
Laser Tooth Preparation for Pit and Fissure Sealing |
|
| Yair Schwimmer, Nurit Beyth, Diana Ram, Eitan Mijiritsky, Esti Davidovich | | International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(21): 7813 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 2 |
Shear bond strength and microleakage of a new self-etch adhesive pit and fissure sealant |
|
| Vinay PITCHIKA,Sebastian BIRLBAUER,Meng-Ling CHIANG,Christoph SCHULDT,Alexander CRISPIN,Reinhard HICKEL,Jan KÜHNISCH | | Dental Materials Journal. 2018; 37(2): 266 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 3 |
Shear bond strength and microleakage of a new self-etch adhesive pit and fissure sealant |
|
| Vinay PITCHIKA,Sebastian BIRLBAUER,Meng-Ling CHIANG,Christoph SCHULDT,Alexander CRISPIN,Reinhard HICKEL,Jan KÜHNISCH | | Dental Materials Journal. 2018; 37(2): 266 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 4 |
Comparison of marginal microleakage of flowable composite restorations in primary canine teeth prepared with high-speed diamond bur, Er:YAG laser and Er,Cr:YSGG laser |
|
| Beheshteh Malekafzali,Mohammad Asnaashari,Fateme Javadi | | LASER THERAPY. 2017; 26(3): 195 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 5 |
Comparison of marginal microleakage of flowable composite restorations in primary canine teeth prepared with high-speed diamond bur, Er:YAG laser and Er,Cr:YSGG laser |
|
| Beheshteh Malekafzali,Mohammad Asnaashari,Fateme Javadi | | LASER THERAPY. 2017; 26(3): 195 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 6 |
Shear bond strength and microleakage of a self-etching adhesive for fissure sealing after different types of aging |
|
| Christoph SCHULDT,Sebastian BIRLBAUER,Vinay PITCHIKA,Alexander CRISPIN,Reinhard HICKEL,Jan KÜHNISCH | | Dental Materials Journal. 2016; 35(3): 490 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 7 |
microbial microleakage assessment of a new hydrophilic fissure sealant: a laboratory study |
|
| bagherian, a. and ahmadkhani, m. and sheikhfathollahi, m. and bahramabadinejad, r. | | pediatric dentistry. 2013; 35(7): e194-e198 | | [Pubmed] | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Article Access Statistics | | | Viewed | 7925 | | | Printed | 458 | | | Emailed | 8 | | | PDF Downloaded | 266 | | | Comments | [Add] | | | Cited by others | 7 | | |
|
|
Users online:
