Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2026
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Clinical evaluation of three fissure sealants: 24 month follow-up
1Dept. Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Croatia. dukic@sfzg.hr
Aim:
This was to compare 3 different materials for fissure sealing (FS) after clinical use during the 24 month period and to assess the use of flowable composite resins in combination with dentine adhesives as sealing materials.
Study Design:
There were 41 patients aged from 7-17, for whom 100 permanent molars were sealed with 3 different sealing materials.
Methods:
Group A, 33 teeth were sealed with the material Helioseal Clear Chroma (Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein); Group B, 33 teeth were sealed with the material Teethmate F1 (Kuraray, Kurashiki, Japan, and in Group C, 34 teeth were sealed with the flowable composite Tetric Flow (Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein). For the analysis of the degree of retention, the criteria used were: 0--complete retention, 1--loss of (1/3) of material, 2--loss of (2/3) of material, 3--complete loss of material. Clinical criteria for appearance of a new caries lesion included following values: Caries present (+) or caries absent (-).
Statistics:
Chi-Square test was used for statistical analysis of retention rates between groups.
Results:
After the 24 month period, the highest retention rate of complete retention was established for the material Tetric Flow of 76.5%, Helioseal Clear Croma 66.7%, and Teethmate F1 60.6%. The incidence of caries at Helioseal Clear Croma was 6.1%, for Teethmate F1 3%, with no statistically significant difference after the 24 months period (p=0.656). In the group of teeth sealed with Tetric Flow, there was not a single case of caries noted.
Conclusions:
The use of flowable composites as sealing materials is equal to other materials for fissure sealing.
