The Influence of Placement Technique and Composite Type on the Proximal Contact in Class II Resin Restorations

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Dentist at ministry of health, Egypt.

2 Professor of operative dentistry Faculty of dental medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt

3 Assistant professor of operative dentistry, Faculty of dental medicine for girls , Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the influence of the placement technique and type of composite resin on the restoration of proximal contact in class II resin composite restorations in comparison to amalgam restoration. Materials and methods: 100 standardized mesiooclusual (MO) cavities were prepared in 100 artificial mandibular first molars used in the study grouped into four groups according to type of restorations; (co): amalgam restorations (10 specimens),( C1): flowable composite (nanohybrid Z350) (30 specimens),( C2): conventional / regular composite (nanohybrid Z250) (30 specimens), (C3): packable composite (microhybrid P60) (30 specimens).The composite restoration groups were further divided into three groups 10 specimens each according to placement techniques as follows:(P1): Tofflemire matrix system. (P2): sectional matrix system with special rings.(P3): transparent matrix system. Tensometer was used to measure the contact tightness and the length of the contact arc. Results Data was analyzed using two way ANOVA. Results showed that using transparent matrix with conventional composite was the only group that showed higher statically significant results to the control group. Conclusion: Amalgam is still superior to composite resin in restoring proximal contact, Packable (condensable) composite offers neither advantage nor other composite in restoring contact, Matrix system performance varied according to composite type used.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Al-Azhar Dental Journal for Girls
Volume 7, 4-C
October 2020
Pages 531-535

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics