A randomized control clinical trial of fissure sealant retention: XXXX adhesive versus total etch adhesive.

@entity1 @entity2133 @entity14062 @entity3149
CONTEXT: There are limited studies on comparison of Total etch (TE) and @entity14062 ( @entity3149 ) adhesive for placement of sealants. AIMS: The aim of the study was to compare the retention of fissure sealants placed using TE adhesive to those sealants placed using @entity3149 ( @entity3149 ) adhesive. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The study was conducted in the dental section, Aga Khan University Hospital. This study was a randomized single blinded trial with a @entity2133 design. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 37 @entity1 , 101 teeth were included in both study groups. The intervention arm was treated with @entity3149 Adhesive (Adper Easy One, 3M ESPE, US). Control arm received TE adhesive (Adper Single Bond 2, 3M ESPE, US) before sealant application. The @entity1 were followed after 6 months for assessment of sealant retention. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Interexaminer agreement for outcome assessment was assessed by Kappa Statistics and outcome in intervention group was assessed by McNemar's test. RESULTS: Ninety-one pairs of molar (90%) were reevaluated for sealant retention. Complete retention was 56% in TE arm and 28% in @entity3149 arm with an odds ratio (OR) of 3.7. CONCLUSIONS: Sealants applied with TE adhesives show higher rate of complete sealant retention than @entity3149 adhesive.
