窝沟釉质成形封闭术封闭剂渗透性和密合性的扫描电镜观察

为了评价窝沟釉质成形封闭术（ＥｎａｍｅｌｏｐｌａｓｔｙＳｅａｌａｎｔＴｅｃｈｎｉｑｕｅ,简称ＥＳＴ）的效果,作者采用扫描电镜（ＳｃａｎｎｉｎｇＥｌｅｃｔｒｏｎＭｉｃｒｏｓｃｏｐｅ,简称ＳＥＭ）观察釉质成形封闭术封闭剂的渗透性和与牙面的密合性,并以普通封闭术（ＣｏｎｖｅｎｔｉｏｎａｌＳｅａｌａｎｔＴｅｃｈｎｉｑｕｅ,简称ＣＳＴ）作对照,并对釉质成形封闭术的应用机理进行初步研究．结果表明,釉质成形封闭术优于普通封闭术．     

不同牙面处理技术对窝沟封闭边缘密合性的影响

目的：以离体牙为研究对象,运用扫描电镜和激光共聚焦扫描显微镜观察不同牙面预备技术对窝沟封闭后边缘密合性的影响,为临床选择适宜的牙面预备技术提供实验依据。方法：60颗离体第三磨牙随机分为3组,每组20颗：A组,传统杯刷清洁（CST）;B组,窝沟釉质成形术（EST）;C组,非创伤性充填（ART）;牙面处理后分别涂布窝沟封闭材料。将实验标本浸于罗丹明B溶液染色后采用激光共聚焦扫描显微镜观察标本微渗漏深度;采用扫描电镜观察封闭剂与牙釉质结合处的超微结构。结果：EST组所产生的微渗漏深度最低,其次是ART组,对照组所产生的微渗漏深度最高。扫描电镜下,EST组中窝沟封闭剂与牙釉质之间渗透性好,ART组和对照组中窝沟封闭剂与牙釉质之间渗透性较好。结论：研究表明不同牙面处理技术对窝沟封闭边缘密合性的影响有显著性差异。ART技术与CST技术相似,封闭剂与牙釉质的边缘密合性较好,为ART技术应用于窝沟封闭提供了有力的证据。     

粘接剂对窝沟封闭剂边缘密合性影响的实验研究

目的 通过窝沟封闭剂微渗漏实验及超微结构观察,探讨使用全酸蚀粘接剂(Prime & Bond NT )和自酸蚀粘接剂(Clearfil SE Bond)对窝沟封闭剂与牙面密合性的影响.方法 选取无龋正畸减数上前磨牙65颗,随机分为5组,即:常规组、唾液污染组、全酸蚀粘接剂组(Prime&Bond NT)、唾液污染+全酸蚀粘接剂组(Prime&Bond NT)和自酸蚀粘接剂组(Clearfil SE Bond),按不同处理方式进行窝沟封闭.将每组10颗标本浸泡在1%亚甲蓝溶液中72小时后取出,制作切片,测定微渗漏深度,计算微渗漏率,并进行统计学方差分析;另外3颗/组使用扫描电镜观察封闭界面的超微结构.结果 微渗漏实验中,使用全酸蚀粘接剂组产生微渗漏最小,唾液污染组明显高于常规组(P<0.01),唾液污染+全酸蚀粘接剂组显著低于唾液污染组(P<0.01),自酸蚀粘接剂组产生的微渗漏最高,明显高于其他各组(P<0.01).扫描电镜观察显示,常规组可见釉质表面结构清晰,大量树脂突深入至釉柱中,二者结合紧密,无缝隙.全酸蚀粘接剂组树脂突长而密集,封闭剂与釉质结合良好.唾液污染组仅见少量树脂突,树脂突短小,粘接界面有的部位出现缝隙.唾液污染+全酸蚀粘接剂组可见粘接剂渗入釉质微孔中形成密集的树脂突,窝沟封闭剂与釉质形成良好的结合.自酸蚀粘接剂组未见明显树脂突,封闭剂与釉质之间有明显的缝隙.结论 全酸蚀粘接剂(Prime&Bond NT)可以增强窝沟封闭剂与牙面的密合性.与常规的磷酸酸蚀方法相比,直接使用自酸蚀粘接剂(Clearfil SE Bond)后,窝沟封闭剂的边缘密合性差,不适宜用于窝沟封闭临床操作中.     

窝沟封闭边缘微渗漏研究进展

窝沟封闭术是现已公认的一项有效预防牙面窝沟裂隙龋的方法。窝沟封闭后边缘微渗漏的存在可影响封闭效果。笔者就影响窝沟封闭边缘微渗漏的各种因素相关研究进展进行综述。     

窝沟封闭项目成本—效果影响因素浅析

窝沟封闭项目成本──效果影响因素浅析广东省口腔医院（邮５１０２６０）黄少宏龋齿是世界上最广泛流行的疾病。世界卫生组织推荐的龋齿预防保健措施中，窝沟封闭项目被列为仅次于氟化物项目的主要方法，封闭剂的应用使龋齿降低率在６０～９９％，作为预防项目窝沟封闭正...     

西安市窝沟封闭项目干预效果影响因素的定性研究

目的:定性分析西安市窝沟封闭干预效果的影响因素,为项目质量管理工作提供依据和政策建议,推动项目深入开展和质量持续提高.方法:制定定性访谈提纲,在窝沟封闭项目管理人员、口腔临床专家、窝沟封闭操作医师共32人中开展专题小组讨论.借助MAXqda软件整理、标记、归类转录资料.结果:窝沟封闭预防龋病的主要影响因素有服务供给侧因素、服务需求侧因素和外部管理因素.结论:应加大政府经费投入,完善以学校为基础的项目工作模式,加强定点医疗机构管理和质量督导,以提高窝沟封闭质量.     

窝沟釉质成形术对封闭剂渗透性及密合性的影响

目的 通过观察封闭剂的渗透性和密合性,进一步探讨窝沟釉质成形封闭术的作用机制。方法 取离体牙６０颗,分为Ａ、Ｂ、Ｃ３个组,Ａ、Ｂ两组分别用窝沟釉质成形封闭术（ｅｎａｍｅｌｏｐｌａｓｔｙ ｓｅａｌａｎｔ ｔｅｃｈｎｉｑｕｅ,ＥＳＴ）和窝沟杯刷清洗封闭术（ｃｕｐ－ｓｈａｐｅｄ ｂｒｕｓｈ ｓｅａｌａｎｔ ｔｅｃｈｎｉｑｕｅ,ＣＳＴ）,Ｃ组作为对照组,进行酸蚀、隔湿干燥后涂封闭剂光照。采用染料浸染法和体     

玻璃离子和窝沟封闭剂封闭窝沟的效果评价

我科自 1998年起分别应用窝沟封闭剂及玻璃离子材料作窝沟封闭治疗 ,并将结果进行统计对比 ,以评价两种材料的防龋效果 ,报告如下。材料与方法1 临床资料　本研究的受试者为 6～ 9岁儿童 ,要求发育正常 ,全身健康状况良好 ,第一恒磨牙已有 2～ 4颗萌出且无明显龋坏。受试者 186名 ,男 83名 ,女 10 3名。选择受试者的第一恒磨牙作为封闭对象 ,共完成 2 32颗牙的窝沟封闭 ,其中上颌牙 110颗 ,下颌牙 12 2颗 ,我们选用日本Ｇ .Ｃ公司所生产的ＦｕＪｉⅡ型玻璃离子及贺利氏古莎公司生产的ＥｓｔｉｓｅａｌＬＣ光固化窝沟封闭剂。2 治疗方法　将…     

不同封闭材料对乳磨牙窝沟封闭边缘微渗漏影响的实验研究

目的:研究Surfill Smart Dentin Replacement(SDR)与传统窝沟封闭剂(Concise)在乳磨牙窝沟封闭中的边缘微渗漏情况.方法:收集乳磨牙离体牙30颗,随机分为5组(n=6),按照不同实验方法进行窝沟封闭处理:A组(对照组):酸蚀+Concise窝沟封闭剂;B1:酸蚀+通用型粘接剂+Co...     

四种因素对窝沟封闭剂渗透性影响的体外研究

目的：体外比较不同窝沟处理方法,窝沟是否污染,不同封闭材料,不同光照时间对窝沟封闭剂渗透性的影响。方法：48颗离体前磨牙,随机分为16组,每组3颗牙,分别采用不同封闭材料及方法进行窝沟封闭,体视显微镜下观察,对窝沟封闭剂的渗透率进行测定。结果：窝沟封闭材料、窝沟处理方法两种处理因素自身不同水平比较,差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,窝沟封闭材料和窝沟处理方法之间存在交互作用（P〈0.05）。结论：窝沟釉质成形术与封闭剂Helioseal F联合应用进行窝沟封闭具有很好的临床应用价值。     

玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂的应用研究

窝沟封闭是预防点隙沟裂龋发生的一种有效方法。近年来．玻璃离子材料作为封闭剂使用受到很大关注，本文就玻璃离子封闭剂的发展．特点，临床效果．适用指征，国内研究状况等方面作一介绍,以供参考。     

Retention of sealants over carious and sound tooth surfaces

Bacteriologic and clinical studies suggest that sealants can be used therapeutically on incipient caries of the enamel. The present study was designed to explore this approach further by determining whether there is a difference in retention rates on sound or carious tooth surfaces sealed for the first time as well as resealed surfaces. A total of 1766 teeth were sealed for subjects 12-14 yr of age of which 120 were judged to be carious. Mouths were divided sagittally on a random basis and an ultraviolet light activated resin with a filler or an autopolymerizing resin without a filler was placed on contralateral surfaces of all molar and premolar teeth. The effects of sealant type, caries status, arch and tooth type on retention over a 2-yr period were tested using Mantel-Haenszel statistics. At the end of 1 yr, 88% of the teeth sealed with the autopolymerizing resin were judged to be completely intact compared to 82% of the teeth filled with the ultraviolet light resin. At the end of the second year the retention rates were 84% and 75% respectively. The retention rates for carious and sound teeth at the end of both years were almost identical. Overall, premolars had a 15% more favorable retention rate than molars. There were minimal differences between arches although maxillary premolars had approximately a 5% higher retention rate than mandibular premolars. The reverse was true for molar teeth. Retention of sealants at the end of the second year (resealed after 1 yr) was 4% less than comparable teeth sealed initially.     

Retention of resin-based pit and fissure sealants: A systematic review

The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review on the retention of resin-based sealants (RBSs) according to the material used and the clinical procedure. An electronic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library and SCOPUS was completed by a hand search in conference proceedings. One hundred and twenty-four studies were identified, 31 of which were included. The retention rate of auto-polymerized and light-cured RBSs did not differ significantly. Light-cured RBSs had a significantly higher retention rate than fluoride-containing light-cured RBSs at 48 months (RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.72-0.89) and more. Concerning the clinical procedure, the scarcity of well-conducted studies made judgement difficult, except for the isolation stage. If using a rubber dam did not affect retention of auto-polymerized RBSs, it did for fluoride-containing light-cured RBSs (RR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.51-2.73).     

不同渗透时间对窝沟封闭边缘封闭性能的影响

目的 研究窝沟封闭剂渗透时间对窝沟封闭边缘微渗漏、渗透程度及超微结构的影响。方法 取离体牙50颗,随机分成5组,每组10颗,每个样本咬合面窝沟处行窝沟釉质成形术,然后酸蚀,冲洗干燥。组1~组5直接涂布封闭剂,组1即刻固化,组2~组5分别停留15 s、30 s、45 s和60 s后光照固化。采用1%亚甲蓝浸染法和体视显微镜观察封闭剂与牙面间的密合程度及封闭剂的渗透程度。用原子力显微镜（atomic force microscope, AFM）观察即刻组及30 s组窝沟封闭剂牙齿交界面的树脂形成情况。结果 窝沟封闭剂牙面停留30 s及以上组的窝沟封闭剂渗透程度显著优于其他渗透时间组,原子力显微镜观察显示即刻组及30 s组树脂突明显,排列密集,清晰规则。结论 光照前封闭剂涂布后可适当停留30 s。     

Glass ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants: a clinical study

Abstract – The aim of this study was to compare the retention rate of a glass ionomer cement formulated for fissure sealing with two resin-based sealants. 208 occlusal fissures of permanent molars and premolars were sealed with either Fuji III, Delton or Concise WS by four dentists. Clinical assessments and a replica scoring technique were used to register the performance of the sealants at baseline, after 6–12 months, and then yearly up to 5 yr. As judged clinically, 61% of the glass ionomer sealants were lost within 6–12 months and 84% after 30–36 months. Although total loss was recorded clinically for the majority of the glass ionomer sealants, some retained sealant was observed in the tooth replicas in 93%, of them. The clinical evaluation of the resin-based sealants showed an average complete retention rate of 90% after 4.5–5 yr. The corresponding figure with the replica technique was 58%. Caries was recorded in 5% of the resin-based and in none of the glass ionomer sealed surfaces.     

Comparison of glass-ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants: a 2-year clinical trial

Abstract – In recent years, the interest in the use of glass-ionomer materials as fissure sealants has increased. The aim of this study was to compare the retention and caries-preventive effect of glass-ionomer (Fuji III) and resin-based light-cured (Delton) fissure sealants. Three health center dentists applied the sealants to 166 children; glass-ionomer sealants on one side and resin-based sealants on the contralateral side of the mouth. After 2 yr, one pair of molar teeth in the mouths of 151 children was compared. Twenty-six percent of glass-ionomer and 82% of resin-based sealants were totally present ( P < 0.001). During the 2 yr, in both groups 4.6% of the sealed surfaces became carious. The results show that the retention of glass-ionomer sealants is markedly inferior to the resin-based sealants. In this study, however, no difference in caries increment on the sealed surfaces was observed. This may be due to the different mechanism of caries prevention for the sealant materials, or to the overall low caries activity of the participants.     

Pit and fissure sealants: Another major cornerstone in preventive dentistry

Despite dramatic reductions in caries in fluoridated communities, the disease continues to occur during childhood and adolescence and there is a sustained caries susceptibility of pits and fissures. Pit and fissure sealants have been available to the dental profession for the past two decades. Closely following community water fluoridation, this use of adhesive technology is now recognized as a major cornerstone of modern preventive dentistry. However, the technique appears to have been slow in implementation by the dental profession. Recent expanded utilization of sealants in the public sector, particularly in Victoria, has increased the awareness of the procedure amongst the public and is heightening demand. A review of the pertinent literature and current trends in utilization of sealants is presented. The case is made for expanded utilization of sealants in both the public and private sectors of dental health care delivery in Australia.     

The use of dental sealants in adults: a long‐neglected preventive measure

To cite this article:
Int J Dent Hygiene 8, 2010; 198–203
DOI: 10.1111/j.1601‐5037.2009.00425.x
Gore DR. The use of dental sealants in adults: a long‐neglected preventive measure. Abstract: The consensus among the general public appears to be that dental sealants are intended to be used primarily with children whose teeth are in the early developmental stage, yet little attention is given to the preventive long‐term aspects when applying them to adult permanent dentition. This article explores the rationale and substantiates the use of dental sealants among the adult population in reducing occlusal pit‐and‐fissure caries while accentuating a beneficial oral health lifestyle.