Oba, Aylin AkbaySonmez, Isil SarogluErcan, ErtugrulDulgergil, Turksel2020-06-252020-06-252012Aylin Akbay Oba, Işıl Şaroğlu Sönmez, Ertuğrul Ercan, Türksel Dülgergil; Comparison of Retention Rates of Fissure Sealants Using Two Flowable Restorative Materials and a Conventional Resin Sealant: Two-Year Follow-Up. Med Princ Pract 1 April 2012; 21 (3): 234–237.1011-7571https://doi.org/10.1159/000333561https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12587/5363ERCAN, Ertugrul/0000-0002-4753-6553; sonmez, isil/0000-0002-3530-0244Objective: The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the retention rates of two flowable restorative systems (Admira Flow and Grandio Flow) with that of a conventional resin-based sealant (Fissurit F). Materials and Methods: The study was planned as a clinical trial with a split-mouth design. A total of 122 sealants (38 Admira Flow, 41 Grandio Flow, 43 Fissurit F) were randomly applied to completely erupted permanent molars in 35 patients aged 9-20 years and followed up for 24 months. Data were analyzed using Pearson's chi(2) and multiple comparison tests. Results: At the end of the follow-up period, Fissurit F had higher retention rates (81.0%) than both Admira Flow (60.5%) and Grandio Flow (57.1%), with p < 0.05. However, there was no significant difference in caries development among groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The two flowable composite resin materials used as fissure sealant were less retentive than the conventional resin sealant. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Baseleninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFlowable compositeRetentionFissure sealantArticle21323423710.1159/0003335612-s2.0-8485958296522156663Q1WOS:000305799100007Q3