{"title":"In Vitro Comparison of the Performance of Hydrophilic and Conventional Hydrophobic Resin-Based Fissure Sealants","authors":"Tahsin Hossain Anika , Choltacha Harnirattisai , Siriruk Nakornchai , Varangkanar Jirarattanasopha","doi":"10.1016/j.identj.2025.04.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Hydrophilic sealants were developed to overcome hydrophobic sealant moisture sensitivity; however, there is still a limited understanding of their performance. This study aimed to compare microshear bond strength, penetration depth, and microleakage of hydrophilic UltraSeal XT hydro and hydrophobic Clinpro resin-based sealants placed in various surface conditions.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Seventy-two enamel slices and 60 molars were randomly assigned into two groups: Group 1 UltraSeal XT hydro and Group 2 Clinpro, which were further subdivided into three groups based on the enamel surface conditions (dry, slightly moist, and saliva-contaminated). After applying sealant and undergoing 5000 thermocycling cycles, microshear bond strength was tested. Additionally, penetration depth and microleakage were evaluated under a light microscope after staining with 50% silver nitrate solution.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Group 1 demonstrated significantly higher microshear bond strength than Group 2 across all experimental conditions (<em>P</em> < .001). Both sealants showed the highest microshear bond strengths under dry conditions, followed by slightly moist and saliva-contaminated conditions (<em>P</em> < .001). The penetration depth between the two sealant types was comparable within each surface condition. However, both sealants showed significantly deeper penetration on dry enamel surfaces compared to slightly moist and saliva-contaminated surfaces (<em>P</em> < .001). Similarly, both sealants exhibited significantly less microleakage on dry enamel surfaces compared to slightly moist and saliva-contaminated surfaces (<em>P</em> < .001). While the mean microleakage value was similar between the two sealants under dry and saliva-contaminated conditions, Group 1 showed significantly lower microleakage than Group 2 under moist conditions (<em>P</em> < .001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The hydrophilic UltraSeal XT hydro sealant exhibited superior bond strength compared to the hydrophobic Clinpro sealant across all surface conditions. On slightly moist surfaces, UltraSeal XT hydro showed significantly lower microleakage than Clinpro. Both sealants exhibited superior sealing and retentive ability on dry enamel surface<strong>s</strong> compared to the other surfaces.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13785,"journal":{"name":"International dental journal","volume":"75 4","pages":"Article 100824"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020653925001133","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Hydrophilic sealants were developed to overcome hydrophobic sealant moisture sensitivity; however, there is still a limited understanding of their performance. This study aimed to compare microshear bond strength, penetration depth, and microleakage of hydrophilic UltraSeal XT hydro and hydrophobic Clinpro resin-based sealants placed in various surface conditions.
Methods
Seventy-two enamel slices and 60 molars were randomly assigned into two groups: Group 1 UltraSeal XT hydro and Group 2 Clinpro, which were further subdivided into three groups based on the enamel surface conditions (dry, slightly moist, and saliva-contaminated). After applying sealant and undergoing 5000 thermocycling cycles, microshear bond strength was tested. Additionally, penetration depth and microleakage were evaluated under a light microscope after staining with 50% silver nitrate solution.
Results
Group 1 demonstrated significantly higher microshear bond strength than Group 2 across all experimental conditions (P < .001). Both sealants showed the highest microshear bond strengths under dry conditions, followed by slightly moist and saliva-contaminated conditions (P < .001). The penetration depth between the two sealant types was comparable within each surface condition. However, both sealants showed significantly deeper penetration on dry enamel surfaces compared to slightly moist and saliva-contaminated surfaces (P < .001). Similarly, both sealants exhibited significantly less microleakage on dry enamel surfaces compared to slightly moist and saliva-contaminated surfaces (P < .001). While the mean microleakage value was similar between the two sealants under dry and saliva-contaminated conditions, Group 1 showed significantly lower microleakage than Group 2 under moist conditions (P < .001).
Conclusion
The hydrophilic UltraSeal XT hydro sealant exhibited superior bond strength compared to the hydrophobic Clinpro sealant across all surface conditions. On slightly moist surfaces, UltraSeal XT hydro showed significantly lower microleakage than Clinpro. Both sealants exhibited superior sealing and retentive ability on dry enamel surfaces compared to the other surfaces.
期刊介绍:
The International Dental Journal features peer-reviewed, scientific articles relevant to international oral health issues, as well as practical, informative articles aimed at clinicians.