Research Article

Influence of Light-Curing Mode on the Erosion Preventive Effect of Three Different Resin-Based Surface Sealants

Table 2

Sealer permeability.

GroupMaterialLight-curing time (s)Measurement 1Measurement 2Cumulative

1 Unsealed control103.4 (30.3)75.3 (29.9)178.7 (50.6)
2S&P10 *2.9a (2.2)85.9a (31.8) *88.8a (31.9)
37 *2.5c (2.5)77.5b (29.7) *80.1b (28.9)
43 *2.6e (2.1) *105.1c (20.2) *107.8c (20.9)
5K-018410 *6.1a (7.6)50.7a (16.0) *56.8a (21.4)
67 *5.7c (4.4) *42.8b (15.3) *48.4b (16.1)
73 *2.9e (1.7)49.1d (17.0) *52.0c (17.1)
8SCS10 *50.2b (26.9)48.2a (28.7) *98.3a (49.5)
97 *47.1d (27.9)65.5b (32.3) *112.6b (55.0)
103 *44.0f (29.0)58.7d (28.0) *102.7c (53.1)

Calcium release μg (±SD) ( 𝑣 = 500 μL) in the different groups (1–10) (S&P: Seal&Protect, K-0184: experimental sealer and SCS: syntac classic system).
Values that are significantly different to the respective untreated controls are marked with*.
Within the same measurement and same material, values for different light-curing durations, were not statistically significantly different.
Comparisons between values within the same measurement and same light-curing duration for different materials that are not significantly different are marked with same lower case letter.