可见光因化和自凝窝沟封闭剂的二年临床效果

采用自身对侧对照的设计方法，对自制光固化和自凝两种封闭剂进行临床效果观察。随访结果表明，封闭剂的完全保留率，６月，１年，２年，光固化封闭剂分别为９１．０８％，８５．５７％，９．７０％，自凝封闭剂分别为９４．３４％，９０．５１％，７６．３０％，卡方检验，两者在１，２年效果为显著差异，自凝高于光固化。     

不同固化方式对封闭剂性能的影响

考察光固化、化学固化两种固化方式对封闭剂性能的影响。从粘结性能看，粘度值相近，树脂突长度无显著差异，但抗剪粘结强度光固化优于化学固化。在机械性能上，自制材料表面硬度、径向抗张强度光固化高于化学固化，在抗压强度上两者差异不大（Ｐ＞０．０５），但Ｃｏｎｃｉｓｅ材料结果与此相反，原因有待进一步研究，吸水性和磨耗率都是光固化小。总体评价，光固化实验室性能优于化学固化。     

可见光固化和自凝窝沟封闭剂的二年临床效果

采用自身对侧对照的设计方法，对自制光固化和自凝两种封闭剂进行临床效果观察。随访结果表明，封闭剂的完全保留率，６月、１年、２年，光固化封闭剂分别为９１．０９％、８５．５７％、６９．７０％，自凝封闭剂分别为９４．３４％、９０．５１％、７６．３０％，卡方检验，两者在１、２年效果有显著差异（Ｐ＜０．０５），自凝高于光固化。远期效果有待进一步观察。     

可见光固化和自凝窝沟封闭剂五年临床效果

自制光固化和自凝两种封闭剂应用于临床，５年随访结果，涂膜保留率，光固化组为２９．６７％，自凝组为２９．１６％，龋病降低率，光固化组为１０．７１％，自凝组为１０．９４％，统计学分析表明，两者无显著性差异（Ｐ〉０．０５），临床效果相似。     

四种窝沟封闭剂渗透性的扫描电镜研究

用扫描电镜观察了自制光固化、自凝及美国Ｃｏｎｃｉｓｅ光固化、自凝封闭剂的渗透性。选择典型图象，输入ＥＭＩ电镜图象处理系统，对封闭剂树脂突长度进行测量，结果表明，四种封闭剂渗透性相似。     

四种窝沟封闭剂渗透性的扫描电镜研究

用扫描电镜观察了自制光固化、自凝及美国Ｃｏｎｃｉｓｅ光固化、自凝封闭剂的渗透性。选择典型图象，输入ＥＭＩ电镜图象处理系统，对封闭剂树脂突长度进行测量；结果表明，四种封闭剂渗透性相似。     

光固化封闭剂与光固化流体树脂窝沟封闭临床效果评价

目的:比较光固化流体树脂与光固化封闭剂在实施窝沟封闭方面防龋成本及保留率的差异。方法:选择上海市7～10岁儿童256名,口腔内至少有1对第一恒磨牙无龋。每名儿童一侧的恒磨牙用光固化流体树脂进行窝沟封闭,另一侧用传统光固化封闭剂进行窝沟封闭,使用便携式牙科椅吸取唾液,并用棉卷隔湿。使用2种方法操作时记录每个牙封闭所用去的棉卷数和操作时间。1a后,检查2种材料在牙面上的保留情况。所有操作均在学校内施行,检查由2名医师用镰形探针进行,采用SPSS10.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果:使用传统光固化封闭剂进行窝沟封闭操作时间每牙需3.53min,而光固化流体树脂组需3.32min(P<0.05)。在封闭剂的保留率方面,光固化流体树脂组显著高于传统的窝沟封闭组(P<0.05)。结论:应用光固化流体树脂进行窝沟封闭,能用较短操作时间达到防龋目的,适合在学校推广应用。     

两种窝沟封闭剂与粘接剂接合使用2年临床效果的评价

有人报道使用窝沟封闭剂前涂粘接剂可以提高涂膜保留率。本文考察了用和不用粘接剂的临床效果。材料和方法采用Concise(3M Dental)和Prisma Shield(LD Caulk)两种光固化封闭剂以及相应的粘接剂Scotchbond 2(3M Dental,不含磷酸醣)、Universal     

可见光固化和自凝窝沟封闭剂的三年临床效果

自制光固化和自凝两种闭剂应用于临床，三年结果表明，涂膜保留率，光固化为６０．３２％，自凝为６５．２５％，卡方检验，两者无显著性差异（Ｐ〉０．０５），临床效果相似。     

几种常用修复材料修复牙齿楔状缺损的临床观察

楔状缺损无论在洞型制备和充填体固位方面均存在一定的难度。为选择较理想的修复楔状缺损的材料和方法。本文分别用自凝玻璃离子水门汀、光固化玻璃离子水门汀、光固化复合树脂和自凝玻璃离子水门汀加光固化复合树脂。这3种材料4种修复方法进行了临床对比观察．6个月后复查结果。4种修复方法在磨耗、折断、脱落的失败率统计学卡方检验均无显著差异。一年后复查。修复体在磨耗方面的失败率存在显著差异；在折断和脱落方面无显著差异。结果表明。光固化树脂修复楔状缺损明显优于玻璃离子水门汀。     

窝沟封闭材料防治老年根龄1年临床效果

目的：考察窝沟封闭剂涂布老年根龋后的临床效果。方法：选用光固化窝沟封闭剂Concise作实验材料、国产玻璃离子作对照,对60岁以上老年患、临床诊断为活动性根龋牙进行封闭治疗。结果：1年时,封闭剂的涂膜保留率为78．57％,玻璃离子的保留率为63．73％,相差有显性（P＜0．05）。结论：Concise封闭剂防治老年根龋临床效果良好。     

不同自酸蚀黏接系统对窝沟封闭剂微渗漏影响的实验研究

目的探讨不同自酸蚀黏接系统对窝沟封闭剂封闭性能和渗透性的影响。方法收集新鲜拔除的离体第三磨牙36颗,随机分成4组,每组9颗,面釉质以杯刷清洁30s;以37%正磷酸酸蚀作为对照组,以ClearFil SE Bond、XenoⅢ以及iBond分别对牙釉质进行黏接作为实验组。涂布可见光固化窝沟封闭剂3MConcise White,光照固化。每组中8颗用1%亚甲基蓝进行染色法检查微渗漏,1颗采用扫描电镜观察封闭剂渗入窝沟的深度以及窝沟封闭剂和牙体组织之间的结合界面的状况。结果Clear FilSE Bond以及XenoⅢ自酸蚀黏接时,对封闭剂微渗漏的影响与对照组相比差异无统计学意义;扫描电镜下,磷酸酸蚀、ClearFil SE Bond以及XenoⅢ组在窝沟封闭中使封闭剂与牙釉质密合性好。结论第五代自酸蚀黏接剂ClearFil SE Bond以及第六代XenoⅢ与牙釉质之间具有良好的封闭能力,可以推荐临床使用。     

不同稀释剂及其比例对封闭剂性能的影响

选用３Ｇ（二甲基丙烯酸二缩三乙二醇酯）、ＥＤＭＡ（甲基丙烯酸乙二醇酯）两种稀释剂，并设计４０％、５０％、５５％、６０％、７０％、８０％６种不同重量比例封闭剂配方，测定粘结性能（包括粘度值、渗透性、抗剪粘结强度）、机械性能（包括表面硬度、抗压强度、径向抗张强度）、吸水性和耐磨性。结果表明：３Ｇ作稀释剂优于ＥＤＭＡ，不同稀释剂比例（在４０％～６０％范围内）对封闭剂性能影响不大，总体评价，以４０％～５０％配方比例为最好。     

A comparative study of two fissure sealants: a 2-year clinical follow-up

The aim of the study was to compare the fluoride-containing fissure sealants (Helioseal F) with the conventional (Concise Light Cure White Sealant) fissure sealants in their retention and caries-prevention capabilities in young population. Sealant materials were applied by three dentists on 122 fissures of first and second molars in 59 adults, 18-20 years of age. One hundred and twenty-two non-carious and unsealed molar teeth were selected as controls. The teeth were assessed using the following criteria: 1 - fully retained (FR), 2 - partially lost (PL), 3 - totally lost (TL) and 4 - decayed (D). All teeth were clinically assessed at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months by two examiners who were blinded to the sealant materials. Data were statistically analysed with chi-square tests. After 3 months 72.1% of sealants were fully retained, at 24 months this had dropped to 46.7%. The partial loss of sealants was at 3 months (15.6%), 6 months (26.2%), 12 months (27.9%) and 24 months (27%). The total loss of Helioseal F (16.4, 19.7, 18, 23% at 3rd, 6th, 12th and 24th months, respectively) was more than the total loss of Concise Light Cure White Sealant (8.2, 9.8, 11.5, 18%, respectively); meaning that the retention rate of Helioseal F was lower than for Concise Light Cure White Sealant. No caries was detected at 3rd and 6th months in all sealant-treated teeth. The incidence of caries in Helioseal F treated teeth at 12 and 24 months was 11.5% and 0% in Concise Light Cure White Sealant treated teeth. The incidence of caries in all fissure-sealant-treated-teeth after 24 months was 5.7 and 25.4% in control group. The results underline that the application of fissure sealants to young people in this sample is an effective method for the prevention of fissure caries.     

Evaluation of shear bond strength and SEM observation of all-in-one self-etching primer used for bonding of fissure sealants

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare enamel shear bond strength of an all-in-one self-etching primer (Prompt L-Pop) to regular acid etch material when bonded to two-fissure sealant systems (Concise and Dyract Seal). METHOD AND MATERIALS: Forty newly extracted non-carious first permanent molars were embedded in a Teflon mold. The teeth were divided into four groups and each consisted of ten specimens. The bonding surfaces were treated with either Prompt L-Pop as recommended by the manufacturer or etched with phosphoric acid. After 24 hours of water storage, the specimens were evaluated for shear bond strength using an Instron testing machine. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) examinations were carried out to evaluate the failure sites of the sealants. RESULTS: The mean shear bond strengths using Prompt L-Pop were Concise: 23.46 MPa and Dyract Seal: 20.34 MPa. These values were higher than and statistically different from those of Dyract Seal (9.99 MPa) and Concise (8.85 MPa) when phosphoric acid was used. The failure was predominantly of the adhesive type. The SEM examination showed the failure of debonding was predominantly related to the type of etching systems used rather than the type of fissure sealants. CONCLUSION: The use of the all-in-one self-etching adhesive Prompt L-Pop improves the mean enamel shear bond strength of fissure sealants.     

自酸蚀黏结剂对恒牙窝沟封闭的疗效评价

目的观察自酸蚀黏结剂AdperTM和PromptTM涂布牙面后,窝沟封闭剂的1年随访保留率和龋降低率。方法选择62例6～14岁儿童、完全萌出的第一(或第二)恒磨牙156颗,采用自身对照方法,比较自酸蚀黏结剂涂布牙面后窝沟封闭(自酸蚀组)与磷酸酸蚀牙面后窝沟封闭(磷酸酸蚀组)的效果。治疗后随访3、6、12个月,应用SPSS12.0统计软件包对数据进行χ2检验及t检验。结果自酸蚀组封闭1颗牙的总操作时间为(122±13)s,较磷酸酸蚀组(219±13)s短(P<0.05)。自酸蚀组和磷酸酸蚀组封闭剂的3个月保留率分别为97.4%和96.2%,6个月保留率分别为94.9%和92.3%,12个月保留率分别为91.0%和88.4%;3个月时2组均未发现龋齿;6个月时磷酸酸蚀组发现1颗龋齿,自酸蚀组龋降低率为100%;12个月时自酸蚀组有3颗龋齿,磷酸酸蚀组有6颗龋齿,自酸蚀组龋降低率为50%。总龋齿发生率2组差异无统计学意义。结论应用自酸蚀黏结剂的窝沟封闭系统,可缩短临床操作时间;封闭剂保留率高,脱落率低,并可降低患儿依从性的要求。     

Evaluation of a pit- and fissure-sealing program in a public dental health service after 2 years

The aim of the present study was to test the caries-preventive effect of a bis-GMA type fissure sealant (Concise Enamel Bond System) in a public dental health service for children. The study compared one group of children, in which all sound permanent teeth were sealed, and a control group in which no sealants were placed. During the study period all children received systematic restorative care, while sealing was performed on the basis of diagnoses made at subsequent examinations by one of the authors. After 2 years a total of 187 children were available for re-examination. Sealant retention was comparable to that obtained in previous studies, but no statistically significant reduction in overall caries increment could be demonstrated. Further analysis showed that only 223 sites had been sealed, while the majority of all erupting sites (394) were either carious or filled before they were screened for the purpose of sealing. It is therefore assumed that only teeth less susceptible to occlusal decay were sealed, thereby explaining the lack of benefit derived from the sealing program.     

Comparative evaluation of the marginal sealing ability of Fuji VII and Concise as pit and fissure sealants

AIM: The anatomical pits and fissures of the teeth have long been recognized as susceptible areas for the initiation of dental caries. The extreme vulnerability to decay of these pits and fissures on the occlusal surfaces has prompted dental scientists to seek methods of caries prevention. Motivated by the role of pit and fissure sealants in caries prevention, the aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of Fuji VII glass ionomer sealant and Concise resin-based sealant. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An in vitro study was undertaken using forty premolars extracted for orthodontic reasons. The teeth were divided into two groups and sealants were applied. One was an experimental group using Fuji VII as a pit and fissure sealant and the other a control group using Concise. The teeth were kept in gentian violet dye for 24 hours, the sectioned samples were observed for the extent of dye penetration, and scores were based on established scoring criteria. RESULTS: The comparison of the performance of the two groups showed a statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: The Concise resin-based sealant performed better in terms of sealing ability than did the Fuji VII glass ionomer sealant.     

The Use of Dental Sealants by Ohio Dentists

Objectives : To assess the extent to which Ohio dentists report using pit and fissure sealants and factors associated with sealant use. Methods : A mail survey of a random sample of Ohio dentists was conducted in 1989 and repeated in 1992 with a newly drawn sample. Only responses from general dentists were analyzed using univariate analyses and multiple regression. Results : Dentists who reported using sealants increased from 79.4 percent in 1989 to 91.8 percent in 1992. In 1992, 42.9 percent were low-level users (<15% of school-aged patients), 41.7 percent were moderate-level users (15–39%), and 15.3 percent were high-level users (>39%). Over three-fourths of sealant-using dentists expressed some degree of willingness to seal incipient caries. The level of sealant use was associated with dentists' knowledge about sealants, conservative management of dental caries, number of children seen in the practice, and influence of insurance coverage for sealants. The regression model explained 22.0 percent of the variance. Clinical factors associated with the level of use were: dentists' willingness to seal premolars; caries-free teeth; teeth with deep, narrow pits and fissures; teeth with small, frank occlusal caries; and patients 18 years of age or older. This regression model explained only 15.1 percent of the variance. Conclusion : The great majority of Ohio dentists report using sealants. The percent of reported sealant users increased between 1989 and 1992. Ohio dentists are not consistent with regard to the percent of their child patients for whom they apply sealants or their willingness to seal incipient caries. Dentists continue to identify lack of insurance coverage for sealant application as a major barrier to patients receiving the service.