FindTrial
Sign In

Comparison of Different Methods of Enamel Preparation Before Pit and Fissure Sealants

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02594020
Enrollment
400
Registered
2015-11-02
Start date
2008-06-30
Completion date
2015-12-31
Last updated
2016-04-25

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Dental Caries, Enamel Lesions

Keywords

suspected caries, initial enamel lesions

Brief summary

This study concerns the prevention of dental caries by sealing pits and fissures of permanent molars with a photopolymerizable resin. It must compare these three techniques Microdentisty (air abrasion, abrasion and sound using small cutters) usually used to prepare micro cavities in the enamel and / or the outer third of the dentin. These three commonly used techniques have never been compared by retaining as endpoint retention of sealant. These techniques are painless and do not require local anesthesia.

Interventions

PROCEDUREair abrasion

already used intervention to prepare micro cavities of the dental to be treated by a photopolymerizable resin

PROCEDUREsono abrasion

already used intervention to prepare micro cavities of the dental to be treated by a photopolymerizable resin

PROCEDUREdental bur

already used intervention to prepare micro cavities of the dental to be treated by a photopolymerizable resin

Sponsors

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Affiliated with the Social Security * Attendance at inspections * Subject to high individual risk of caries * Subjects with at least two pairs of molars and contralateral counterparts with the initial lesions of enamel (pits and fissures colored) or suspected of dentine caries (not highlighted by two clinical and radiographic examination usual)

Exclusion criteria

* Molar inaccessible, closed, sealed, or decayed (reaching the dentine

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
observation of quality of treatment2 yearsCompare enamel preparation techniques of air abrasion and sound abrasion technique enameloplasty (pits and fissures extended to the dental bur) the more conventionally used to identify the most effective as using endpoint retention of material sealing of pits and fissures.

Countries

France

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026