Systematic exposure to fluorides, along with better nutrition, rising material standards of living and better access to dental care have reduced the susceptibility of contemporary child populations to infectious diseases affecting the oral cavity.
For example, a recent study of Canadian children aged 13–14 years found that 64% were caries free.
The high susceptibility of these teeth to caries is directly related to morphology of their occlusal surface.
Fluoride's great success in preventing tooth decay on smooth surfaces has made dental caries largely a disease of rough irregularities.
Enamel surfaces with pits and fissures receive minimal caries protection from either systemic or topical fluoride agents, the reason for ineffectiveness of fluorides in the pit and fissure caries may be related to the differences in enamel thickness and the inaccessibility of the base of pits and fissures to topical fluorides.
The most efficient way to prevent pit and fissure caries is by effectively sealing the fissures using resins called pit and fissure sealants.
Materials and methods: In this study, a total of 40 children with all first permanent molars erupted received four different pit and fissure sealants. Results: The data was subjected to Chi-square test and Kaplan Meier survival analysis.
The p-value was calculated using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test.
The present study was conducted to evaluate and compare the retention of the resin-based filled (Helioseal F, Ivoclar Vivadent) and unfilled (Clinpro, 3M ESPE) pit and fissure sealants, which is important for their effectiveness.However, careful selection of patients and teeth for sealant placement is required to ensure cost-effectiveness.Over the past three decades there has been a substantial improvement in the oral health of children as evidenced by declines in the prevalence and severity of dental decay.This difference in retention rates between filled and unfilled pit and fissure sealants was not statistically significant.Conclusion: The difference in retention rates between Helioseal F and Clinpro was not statistically significant, but Clinpro (unfilled) sealant showed slightly higher retention rates and clinically better performance than Helioseal F (filled).