Evaluation of the proximal contact tightness in class II resin composite restorations using different contact forming instruments: a 1-year randomized controlled clinical trial

• Main Authors: Karim M. Abbassy (Author), Waleed A. Elmahy (Author), Ahmed A. Holiel (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: BMC, 2023-10-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.1186/s12903-023-03462-5; 1472-6831
• Keywords: Proximal contact; Sectional matrix; Contact forming instrument; Composite restoration; Dentistry; Dental restoration; Dentistry; RK1-715
• Source: BMC Oral Health, Vol 23, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2023)

Abstract Background Proper proximal contact in direct composite restorations is crucial for periodontal health. Over a one-year period, this study was conducted to assess successive biological changes in proximal contact tightness PCT in class II direct composite restorations and the adjacent teeth by applying sectional matrix system along with different contact forming instruments. Methods 72 direct compound class II composite restorations were performed in patients aged 18-40 years and divided into 4 groups: Group I (n = 18): proximal contact was restored with Palodent plus sectional matrix system, Group II (n = 18): Trimax as contact forming instrument, Group III (n = 18): Perform as contact forming instrument and Group IV (n = 18): Contact pro as contact forming instrument. All contact forming instruments were used along with Palodent plus matrix system. PCT was measured using a digital force gauge before (T0), immediate post operative (T1) and at 3 (T2), 6 (T3), 9 (T4), and 12 months (T5) after restorative treatment. Using One-Way ANOVA, Tukey's post hoc test, and Bonferroni correction, PCT values were compared between groups before and after the intervention restoration. Meanwhile, for comparisons within groups, a paired t-test was conducted (p ≤ 0.05). Results Contact forming instruments combined with Palodent plus sectional matrix system achieved better PCT. Trimax led to a statistically considerable tighter proximal contacts than the other groups (p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found in PCT between Contact pro-2, Perform and Palodent plus sectional matrix system. By means of multivariate analysis, the PCT between both T0 and T1 were increased (p < 0.001) and then it decreased till T5. Conclusions The use of transparent contact forming instruments achieved greater PCT compared to Palodent sectional matrix system alone that gradually decreased throughout 12 months and reached the PCT between the natural teeth. Using Trimax system provided the tightest proximal contacts. Additionally, digital force gauge was confirmed as an inclusive and accurate method to quantify PCT. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05749640: 24/5/2022.