OBJECTIVETo set up a clinical evaluation method for the matrix system, and compare two matrix systems, Palodent and circumferential, by this method.

METHODS101 molars and premolars with class II cavities, which were suitable for resin filling without shift and incline of the adjacent teeth, were randomly divided into study group (Palodent) and control group (circumferential). There were 79 single cavities and 22 paired cavities. One doctor-in-charge completed all cavities filling. Probes were used to test overhang of the filling. Dental floss was used to detect the proximal contact index before and after cavity preparing and immediately and one week after cavity filling. Questionnaires were filled in by patients immediately and one week afrer cavity filling. The tooth models of the filling side were taken, then two doctors-in-charge were responsible for establishing the model evaluation index and one of them conducted the evaluation for all of the models. SPSS 14.0 software was used to analyze the data.

RESULTSAn evaluation system including questionnaire, clinical examination and tooth model evaluation was set up. There were nine indexes in this system. Moreover, this clinical evaluation system was used in this study. It was found that there were no differences on questionnaire and overhang indexes between the two groups. Palodent matrix system got tighter proximal contact than traditional circumferential matrix system. When filling the paired posterior teeth, Palodent matrix system formed better marginal ridge than circumferential matrix system.

CONCLUSIONPalodent matrix system is better than circumferential matrix system in filling the paired posterior teeth.

Bicuspid ; Composite Resins ; Dental Caries ; Dental Cavity Preparation ; Dental Restoration, Permanent ; Humans ; Matrix Bands ; Molar

The use of flowable composite resins as liners in class II packable composite restoration has been suggested by some manufacturers. However, the contributions of this technique are unproven. The purpose of this study was to compare the gingival microleakage in class II packable composite restorations with or without the use of flowable composite resins as liners. Slot cavities were prepared on both proximals of 80 extracted human molars and randomly assigned to 8 groups of 20 each. The gingival margins were located at 1mm above CEJ in 80 cavities (group1-4) and 1mm below CEJ in 80 cavities (group5-8). The prepared teeth were mounted in the customized tray with adjacent teeth to simulate clinical conditions and metallic matrix band (Sectional matrix) and wooden wedges were applied. After acid etching and application of Single Bond, each group was restored with the following materials using incremental placement technique: Group 1,5 (Filtek P60), group 2, 3, 4 and group 6, 7, 8 (AeliteFlo, TetricFlow, Revolution/Filtek P60). All specimens were thermocycled 500 times between 5degrees C and 55degrees C with 1 mimute dwell time, immersed 2% methylene blue dye for 24 hours and then rinsed with tab water. The specimens were embedded in clear resin and sectioned longitudinally through the center of restoration with a low speed diamond saw. Dye penetration at gingival margin was viewed at 20 magnification and analyzed on a scale of 0 to 4. Kruscal-Wallis One way analysis and Mann-Whitney Rank sum test were used to analyze the results. The results of this study were as follows. 1. The leakage values seen at the enamel margin were significantly lower than those seen at the dentin margin(P<0.05). 2. On the enamel margin, packable composite resins with flowable liners showed lower leakage than those without flowable liners, but there were no significant differences among the four groups(P>0.05). 3. On the dentin margin, four groups demonstrated moderate to severe leakage, and there were no significant differences in leakage values(P>0.05).
Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate ; Composite Resins ; Dental Enamel ; Dentin ; Diamond ; Humans ; Matrix Bands ; Methylene Blue ; Molar ; Tooth ; Tooth Cervix ; Water