Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Retention and effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants placed with or without bonding agent in young permanent teeth: A randomized clinical trial with a year follow-up.

Created on 13 Sep 2026

Authors

Madhuri Bandi, Sreekanth K Mallineni, Sivakumar Nuvvula

Published in

Indian journal of dental research : official publication of Indian Society for Dental Research. Volume 31. Issue 6. Pages 877-882.

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of pit and fissure sealants (PFS) placed on young permanent teeth with or without the application of the bonding agent.
A.
total of 100 permanent first molars from 25 children between 6-9 years of age were included and randomly allocated into 2 groups. In group A, the teeth received sealant with the bonding agent, and in group B, without a bonding agent. All the sealed teeth were evaluated for retention of the sealant at regular intervals of 3, 6, and 12 months. The difference in the retention rate with and without bonding was analyzed using Chi-square test.
After 12 months, the clinically acceptable retention rates for PFS placed with and without bonding agent were 80% and 72%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed in relation to marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, and anatomic form among the PFS placed with and without bonding agent (Ps > 0.05).
Sealant application with bonding agent showed an increased retention rate than without the use of a bonding agent. However, an additional step of bonding may be excluded in children, as it did not show any statistically significant difference in clinical retention rate compared to PFS application without bonding.

PMID:
33753657
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 13 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 10
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement