Application of self-etching primer (SEP) saves valuable chair time by eliminating the steps of etching, rinsing drying and placing a sealant prior to bonding orthodontic brackets. Objectives: To compare the resistance to enamel demineralization between SEP and conventional sealant in-vitro. Methods: One hundred and twenty (120) molars were randomly assigned to three groups: SEP (Transbond Plus;3M Unitek), Sealant (Light Bond Fluoride Releasing Sealant;Reliance) or Control (no enamel treatment). After application of SEP or sealant following manufacturer's recommendations, tooth samples were exposed to rotary brushing for 0, 2 or 6 minutes. A 2x2 mm window of sound enamel was created using nail varnish. Following 48 or 72 hrs of acidic challenge with Ten Cate's solution (pH 4.46), multiple 200µm sections stained with Rhodomine B dye were evaluated for incidence of lesion, lesion depth, area, and total fluorescence using confocal microscopy. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey Kramer test. Results: The incidence of lesion in the sealant group was 50%, forming only where sealant integrity was broken; while 100% lesion occurence were observed in the SEP and control groups. Mean lesion depth (149.9±20.5µm), area (636±90 x 10²µm²) and total fluorescence (252±83 x 10⁴) in the SEP group were similar to those measured in the controls. Mean lesion depth (107.6±45µm), area (441±212 x 10²µm²) and fluoresence (160±103 x10⁴) in the Sealant group were significantly smaller than those in the SEP and Control groups (p<0.05). Conclusions: These results suggest that application of a self-etching primer provides no resistance to enamel demineralization as compared to a conventional sealant. Protection from acid demineralization is dependent on the integrity of applied sealant.

Back to the Dental Materials: VIII - Others-Non-metallic Program
Back to the IADR/AADR/CADR 82nd General Session (March 10-13, 2004)

Top Level Search