Amani Ahmad Al Tuwirqi ,

Background/Purpose : Prevention And Management Of Proximal Caries In Primary Teeth Remains A Challenge. This In Vitro Study Aimed To Evaluate The Enamel-protective Potential Of A New Adhesive Agent (G-Coat Plus?) When Used As A Smooth Surface Sealant

Materials and Methods: Twenty Extracted Bovine Permanent Incisors Were Chosen, Then Randomly Distributed Into Two Equal Groups According To The Sealant Material Used: Group I, G-Coat Plus?; And Group IT, Clinpror"" . The Baseline Surface Microhardness (B-SMH) Of Each Tooth Was Measured In The Area Of The Centralized Working Window With A Vickers Microhardness Testing Machine. The Mean Microhardness Values Were Calculated From The Measurements Taken From Three Indentations Created On Each Tooth. The Teeth Were Then Immersed In Demineralizing Solution For 96 H And Incubated At 3rC To Produce Artificial Carious Lesions. The Calcium (Ca) And Phosphorus (P) Concentrations Of The Demineralizing Solutions Were Analyzed Before And After Tooth Immersion.

Results: The Mean Microhardness Values For Groups I And IT Were Statistically Significant At Baseline And After Demineralization (p = 0.007 And P < 0.001 , Respectively). No Significant Difference In Mean Microhardness Was Observed Between The Groups At Baseline (p = 0.055) Indicating That Both Materials Had Comparable Results. However, The Difference In Mean Microhardness Between The Groups Was Statistically Significant After Demineralization (p = 0.001), Indicating Changes In The Mineralization Of The Tooth Samples. Statistical Analyses Demonstrated Significant Differences Among The Two Groups Regarding The Mean Ca And P Concentration Values (Ca:, P = 0.028; P, P < 0.001).Conclusion: G-Coat Plus Exhibited Higher Surface Microhardness Than Clinpro. Both Sealant Materials Released Ca And P Ions, Suggesting That Additional Preventive Measures Are Necessary When Using These Materials As Proximal Sealants.