• H Alharthy, H M Elkhodary, A Nahdreen, A Al Tuwirqi, and K Baghlaf.
• Pediatric Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
• Niger J Clin Pract. 2022 Jun 1; 25 (6): 861-884.

BackgroundEvidence-based information should be provided to clinicians to explain the effectiveness of hydrophilic and hydrophobic forms of resin based sealants (RBSs).AimTo assess and evaluate the retention and cariostatic effect of hydrophilic and hydrophobic RBSs in primary and/ or permanent teeth with at least a follow-up period of 3 months.Materials And MethodsFive databases were searched up to September 2021 for randomized and non-randomized clinical trials (RCTs and non-RCTs) that evaluated the retention and cariostatic effect of hydrophilic and hydrophobic RBSs. Two authors nominated the papers, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias.ResultsBy comparing the retention rate and caries incidence between groups, pooled-effect estimates of included articles were generated. After removing duplicates from the 2,810 titles found, only 1938 remained. Twelve of these were thoroughly examined. A total of 12 papers met the inclusion criteria in qualitative analysis: seven RCTs and five non-RCTs. Only ten studies were included in the meta-analysis: five RCTs and five non-RCTs. After 12 months of follow-up, no significant difference was found in the retention of hydrophilic and hydrophobic RBSs with and without a bonding agent. After 12 months of follow-up, no significant difference was found in the cariostatic effect of hydrophilic and hydrophobic RBSs.ConclusionThere was no statistically significant difference in retention and the cariostatic impact was found between hydrophilic and hydrophobic RBSs.

12 keywords...

hide…