Comparative evaluation of microleakage of glass ionomer and resin based fissure sealants, using noninvasive and invasive techniques

Use of glass ionomer cement as pit and fissure sealant, has added benefit by its fluoride-releasing property. The efficacy of using invasive and non-invasive techniques was assessed by microleakage of Glass ionomer (Triage, G C Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and Resin based sealants (Concise, 3M Dental Products, USA).Methods and Materials: In this in vitro experimental study, 80 sound premolars were divided into four groups of 20. In groups 1 and 2, Triage and in groups 3 and 4, Concise was used. In groups 1 and 3, fissures leaved intact (Noninvasive technique). In groups 2 and 4, fissures were prepared with tapered diamond bur (Invasive technique).The teeth were thermocycled at 5o-55oc for 250 cycles and immersed in 5% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. Sectioned samples were observed for the extent of dye penetration, and scores were based on established scoring criteria. 0- Without dye penetration.1- Dye penetration restricted to the outer half of the sealant.2- Dye penetration restricted to the inner half of the sealant.3- Dye penetration into the underlying fissure.The data were analyzed using Kruskall-Wallis and Man-Whitney tests. There were no statistically significant differences between invasive and noninvasive techniques; but microleakage of Triage was statistically more than Concise. Because there was no difference between the two techniques, invasive technique is not recommended. Considering the recent controversies, it can be said that Triage cannot be a viable alternative for resin based sealants.