{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03898213318895506, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017325392528424473, 'mean_word_length': 4.961290322580645, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Approximal sealings on lesions in neighbouring teeth requiring operative treatment: an in vitro study

Abstract Objectives: With this in vitro study we aimed to assess the possibility of precise application of sealant on accessible artificial white spot lesions (WSL) on approximal surfaces next to a tooth surface under operative treatment. A secondary aim was to evaluate whether the use of magnifying glasses improved the application precision. Material and methods: Fifty-six extracted premolars were selected, approximal WSL lesions were created with 15% HCl gel and standardized photographs were taken. The premolars were mounted in plaster-models in contact with a neighbouring molar with Class II/I–II restoration (Sample 1) or approximal, cavitated dentin lesion (Sample 2). The restorations or the lesion were removed, and Clinpro Sealant was placed over the WSL. Magnifying glasses were used when sealing half the study material. The sealed premolar was removed from the plaster-model and photographed. Adobe Photoshop was used to measure the size of WSL and sealed area. The degree of match between the areas was determined in Photoshop. Results: Interclass agreement for WSL, sealed, and matched areas were found as excellent (κ = 0.98–0.99). The sealant covered 48–100% of the WSL-area (median = 93%) in Sample 1 and 68–100% of the WSL-area (median = 95%) in Sample 2. No statistical differences were observed concerning uncovered proportions of the WSL-area between groups with and without using magnifying glasses (p values ≥ .19). However, overextended sealed areas were more pronounced when magnification was used (p = .01). The precision did not differ between the samples (p = .31). Conclusions: It was possible to seal accessible approximal lesions with high precision. Use of magnifying glasses did not improve the precision.