Comparison of two different matrix band systems in restoring two surface cavities in posterior teeth done by senior undergraduate students at Qassim University, Saudi Arabia: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Abstract

Sectional matrix band system has been found superior to circumferential matrix band system.

Frequency and Localization of Overhanging Restorations

“…It has been pointed out that the possibility of overhanging restorations made with environmental matrix systems is higher than that of sectional matrix systems. 38,39 Besides, in the restorations made with transparent matrix and reflective wedges, more overhanging restorations were detected than with metal matrix and wooden wedges. 40 The adaptation of transparent matrices is difficult compared to that of metal matrices and it is not possible to adapt as tightly as with metal matrices.…”

Sectional matrix solutions: the distorted truth

“…They are classically used in combination with a separating ring, which provides separation of the teeth and stabilises the matrix coronally, favouring the formation of a contact area. 13,14,15 Circumferential matrices are tightened around the tooth and are therefore described as being placed actively. This active placement does potentially confer an advantage over sectional matrices, which are passively placed (not tightened), in that it stabilises the matrix, both cervically and coronally, resulting in reduced formation of overhangs, especially bucco-palatally.…”

“…11 Circumferential matrices have many relative disadvantages however, in that it is very difficult to recreate an anatomical emergence 12,15 which makes achieving a contact area difficult. 14,17 They also result in an inferior morphological contact with reduced contact tightness. 15,17 Even if a contact is achieved, it is more akin to a single point of contact rather than a broad area and is positioned in a nonanatomical, more coronal position.…”

“…5 There is a fairly steep learning curve involved in using sectional matrices however, and they are quite techniquesensitive to place, such that inexperienced operators preferred to use circumferential matrices even when obtaining better clinical outcomes. 14 Sectional matrices are available in different material constructions, opacities, heights, widths, rigidities and emergence profiles (Fig. 2), with a bewildering array of associated equipment, which can make selection difficult for any dentist with limited experience in this area.…”

“…While sectional matrix techniques using separating rings can result in the predictable establishment of contact areas, 13,14,15 they have been shown to result in surface concavity in the restoration at the contact area, which is much less of a problem with circumferential matrices. 21 A concavity in the restored surface at the contact area will be inaccessible to cleaning and tend to harbour biofilm and is often not identifiable clinically 21 (Fig.…”