There is nearly a unanimous standpoint that fissure system is the "region sensitive to caries". These difficulties imposed the consideration of efficient protection of the fissure system from caries. For final realization of this method, both adequate selection and comprehensive planned application of contemporary materials is necessary (composite light-initiated sealants as well as latest glass-ionomers resin fortified) as well as adequately performed technique of their application. The aim of the paper was to estimate the clinical successfulness of application of the two types of sealants, Fissural®-Galenika-composite sealant, representative of Ш generation and Ionosit®-seal-DMG Hamburg, glass-ionomer resin fortified, on the basis of determined clinical criteria as per Cvar and Ryge in the function of time from one week to two years. Clinical investigations were carried out on 72 teeth of transcanine sector with 36 patients of both genders aged 18-25 years, by the method of invasive technique. Upon sealing fissures, teeth were monitored by clinical method - probing of edge attachment of the sealant, as per Cvar and Ryge criteria (retention of the sealant, marginal adaptation, change of surface structure, edge coloring and secondary caries). The results of analysis of all adopted criteria did not show аnу changes after the observation period of 7 days for both preparations. There was evident continued declining trend of the quality of Fissural after two years, which confirmed the declining values of all adopted criteria: full retention of preparations (77.77%), full marginal adaptation (77.77%), edge coloring (11.12%), change of surface structure (88.88%) and appearance of secondary caries (11.12%). With Ionosit® seal, high relative values of all adopted criteria weге retained, with a slight decline. The results confirmed that Ionosit-seal®, a hybrid glass-ionomer sealant showed better qualities than Fissural®, a composite sealant of Ш generation, in all analyzed criteria after observation period of two years.
Handelman SL, Leverett DH, Solomon ES, Brenner CM. Use of adhesive sealants over occlusal carious lesions: radiographic evaluation. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1981;9(6):256–9.
2.
Forss H, Saarni M, Seppä L. Comparison of glass ionomer and resin based sealants.Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1994;22:21–4.
3.
Johnson LM, Duke ES, Camm J, Hermesch CB, Buikema DJ. Examination of a resin- modified glass ionomer material as a pit and fissure sealant. Quinte ssence Int. 1995;26(12):879–83.
4.
Mejare I, Mjör I. Glass ionomer and resin based fissure sealants; a clinical study. Scand J Dent Res. 1990;98:345–50.
5.
Seppä L, Forss H. Resistance of occlusal fissures to demineralization after loss of glass ionomer sealants in vitro. Pediatr Dent. 1991;13(1):39–42.
6.
Morphis TL, Toumba KJ, Lygidakis NA. Fluoride pit and fissure sealants: a review. Int J Pediatr Dent. 2000;10:90–8.
7.
Mitra SB. Adhesion to enamel and physical properties of a light-cured glass ionomer liner/base. J Dent Res. 1995;90:70–2.
8.
Houpt M, Eidelman E, Shey Z, Fuks A, Chosack A, Shapira J. Occlusal restoration using fissure sealant instead of “extension for prevention.” ASDC J Dent Child. 1997;63(1).
9.
stomatologiji ŠJK. Grafi čki zavod Hrvatske. 1988;129–46.
10.
Rykke M. Dental materials for posterior restorations. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1992;8(4):139–48.
11.
Feigal RJ. Sealants and preventive restorations: review of effectiveness and clinical changes for impro vement. Pediatr Dent. 1998;20(2):85–92.
12.
Bader JD, Shugars DA, Bonito AJ. A systematic review of selected caries prevention and management me thods. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2001;29(6):399–411.
13.
Charbeneau GT, Dennison JB, Ryge G. A filled pit and fissure sealant: 18-month results. J Am Dent Assoc. 1977;95:299–306.
14.
Houpt M, Fuks A, Eidelman E. The preventive resin (composite resin/sealant) restoration: Nine-year resul ts. Quintessence Int. 1994;25(3):155–9.
15.
Garcia-Godoy F. The preventive glass ionomer resto ration. Quintessence Int. 1998;19:617–9.
16.
Forsten L. Short-and long-term fluoride release from glass ionomers and other fluoride-containing filling materials in vitro. Scand J Dent Res. 1990;98:179 85.
17.
Fajen VB, Duncanson MG, Nanda RS, Currier GF, Angolkar PV. An in vitro evaluation of bond strength of three glass ionomer cements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1990;97:316–22.
18.
Craene GP, C M, R D. The invasive pit-and-fissure sealing technique in pediatric dentistry: an SEM study of a preventive restoration. ASDC J Dent Child. 1988;55(1):34–42.
19.
M DV. Molaren-Kunststoff-Fuhllungen Mola ren-Kunststoff-Fuhllungen durch die Hintertur Preven tive resin Restoration. durch die Hintertur Preventive Resin Restoration. Vol. 8. 1998.
20.
Going RE, Haugh LD, Grainger DA, Conti AJ. Four year clinical evaluation of a pit and fissure sealant. J Am Dent Assoc. 1977;95(5):972–81.
21.
Cvar JF, Ryge G. Criteria for clinical evaluation of den tal restorative materials. 1991.
22.
Boksman L, Gratton DR, McCutcheon E, Plotzke OB. Clinical evaluation of a glass ionomer cement as a fissure sealant. Quintessence Int. 1987;18:707–9.
23.
May R. Asthetisch-adhessive Fulungstherapie im Seitenzahngebieteine illusion. Dtsch Zahnarzt Z. 2004;463–70.
24.
Hickel R. Indications and materials for fissure sealants. ZWR. 1989;98(11):944–6, 948–51.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
