Clinical and antibacterial assessment of resin infiltrate versus compomer as pit and fissure sealants | ||||
| Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science | ||||
| Article 10, Volume 22, Issue 1, January 2019, Page 69-73 PDF (351.51 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ajdsm.2019.71721 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Mohamed H. Abo Nahas* 1; Samy Y. El Biomy* 2; Ibrahim F. Barakat3 | ||||
| 1Dentist at Egyptian Ministry of Health. | ||||
| 2Professor, Pedodontics and Oral Health Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Boys-Cairo, Al-Azhar University. | ||||
| 3Assistant Professor, Pedodontics and Oral Health Department, Faculty of Dental medicine, Boys, Cairo, AL-Azhar University. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Purpose: The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical and antibacterial effectiveness of resin infiltrate versus Compomer as a pit and fissure sealant. Materials and methods: This in-vivo study was carried out on two hundred, young permanent molars of children ranging from six to twelve years of age. The teeth were equally divided into two groups (100 teeth each), based on the sealant material used in sealing the deep pits and fissures. Result: There was significance difference between the antibacterial effect of the Resin infiltration (ICON) and Compomer while there was significant difference between the clinical retention of Resin infiltration (ICON) and Compomer. Conclusion: Compomer has superior antibacterial action against streptococcus mutans than Resin infiltration (ICON). While Resin Infiltration has superior clinical retention than Compomer. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 242 PDF Download: 195 |
||||
