Comparison of retention rates of fissure sealants using two flowable restorative materials and a conventional resin sealant: two-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE 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 χ(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.