Influence of Metal Versus Transparent Matrices on Proximal Contact Tightness of Class Ii Bulk-Fill Composite Restorations

Abstract

Purpose: This study investigated the effect of metal versus transparent matrix systems on proximal contact tightness (PCT) of class II bulk-fill composite resin restorations.Methods: 80 Ivorine teeth with standardized MO cavity preparations were randomly divided into 4 equal groups (n=20). Group1; sectional metal matrix, group2; pre-contoured circumferential metal matrix in a Tofflemire retainer, group3; conventional metal matrix in a Tofflemire retainer, and group4; Blue Cure-Thru transparent contoured matrix band. All matrices were combined with a separation ring and secured with wooden wedges. Cavity preparations were restored with bulkfill composite resin; SonicFill 2 with the corresponding bonding system following manufacturer's instructions. Composite material cured for 20s using Elipar S10 light curing unit. Teeth were restored in a clinically relevant situation using KaVo manikin head. After matrix and wedge removal, proximal contact tightness was measured using the Tooth Pressure Meter. Means were calculated and data were statistically-analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (p<.05).Results: Means and standard deviation for proximal contact measurements were: 7.62 (.52), 4.01 (.74), 4.13 (.4) and 2.74 (.37) for groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively. There was a statistical significant difference among all groups except between group2 and 3. Conclusions:Under the conditions of this test, it can be concluded that: 1. Proper proximal contact tightness for bulk-fill posterior composite restorations could be produced by sectional metal matrix rather than transparent matrix. 2. Pre-contoured circumferential metal matrix produced the same proximal contact tightness as conventional metal matrix when both used with a separation ring.Clinical Relevance Transparent matrices couldn't be recommended for bulk-fill posterior composite restorations rather than metal matrices.(2820)

Proximal contact tightness of direct Class II composite resin restorations with various matrix systems: A systematic review

“…Whereas, dead-soft matrix due to matrix deformation, sometimes produced negative contour of the proximal area. Further, El-Shamy[ 14 ] also has shown that proper PCT for bulk-fill composite restorations can be produced by sectional metal matrix rather than transparent matrix.…”

“…[ 13 ] in a study comparing different techniques for establishing proximal contacts in posterior composite restoration concluded that there was no difference in the technique used. El-Shamy[ 14 ] compared metal versus transparent matrices and found that sectional metal matrices produced proper PCT. There is a need to examine the literature on various matrix systems used for establishment of proper proximal contacts.…”