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 χ2 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.