- Visibility 408 Views
- Downloads 36 Downloads
- DOI 10.18231/j.ijce.2024.025
-
CrossMark
- Citation
Achieving predictable contacts and contours: A review
- Author Details:
-
Shivali Tyagi *
-
Shravan Rathi
-
Vineeta Nikhil
Introduction
Optimising the shape of teeth has consistently been the ultimate goal in restorative dentistry. It's essential not just for replacing absent tooth structure but also for restoring the ideal form and function.[1] Johnson famously remarked that understanding "contact point" and "interproximal space" should be fundamental for any dental practitioner. [2] The positioning of contacts and contours, vulnerability to dental decay, treatment methods, and their role in preventive dentistry have been carefully considered in both theory and practice for centuries.[3] The initial approach to treating proximal caries involved removing the decay and filling the cavity with suitable materials, without considering the tooth's form and function. The early theory of caries, which suggested that decay starts at the tooth contact point, led to a prophylactic concept aiming for complete and permanent separation of adjacent teeth to create self-cleansing spaces. While this approach did reduce caries rates, it faced criticism for causing tooth disfigurement, food impaction on the gum line, tooth sensitivity, and tooth drifting. In approximately 1890, the concept of contoured restorations emerged, based on idea of caries developing beneath the contact point. These contoured restorations aimed to restore the correct shape of the interproximal space, promoting gum health and patient comfort. This, in turn, safeguarded the stomatognathic system, ensuring harmony and balance.[4]
Atkinson et al. introduced the concept of matricing in 1897 as a means to create contoured fillings.[4] Matricing involves replacing lost dental structure during preparation by constructing a temporary wall opposite the axial walls of the preparations.[5]
Matrices play an indispensable role in restorative dentistry, with matricing being a crucial step in the placement of various types of restorations. Due to the diversity in matrix systems, it is essential for clinicians to be knowledgeable about them
Discussion
Ideal contacts
The proximal contact, also known as the "contact area," denotes the surface where the proximal surfaces of adjacent teeth meet. Initially, during tooth eruption, this interaction occurs at a point, termed a "point contact." Over time, due to proximal attrition, it evolves into a "contact area." Typically positioned in the upper middle third of the crown of most teeth, the contact area facilitates natural embrasures and supports effective maintenance of the interproximal region. [6]
Optimal contacts play vital roles in:
Maintaining dental arch stability by transmitting forces along the long axis of teeth,
Protecting the interdental papilla against food impaction, and
Influencing speech and aesthetics, particularly in the anterior region.
Improper restoration of contact areas can lead to teeth displacement, lifting forces, tooth rotation, occlusal contact discrepancies, and food impaction. This may result in periodontal trauma, causing pain, inflammation, and bleeding.
Matricing and Matrices
Matricing involves replacing lost dental structure during preparation by constructing a temporary wall opposing the axial walls of the preparations. A matrix serves as a tool to secure the restoration in the tooth while it sets.[5]
Ideal requirements of dental matrices include
Rigidity for stability.
Accurate recreation of natural tooth form and interproximal contact.
Effective sealing of proximal and gingival wall areas.
Minimal thickness for precision.
Flexibility for adaptability.
Bio-compatibility for safe use.
Stability for durability.
Adequate optimal transmittance for optimal outcomes.[7]
Matrix system depending on location can be of two types
Anterior matrix system
Posterior matrix system
Anterior matrix systems
It can be classified into: transparent matrix, non-transparent matrix, and rigid matrix system.
Transparent matrix system
These are utilized for tooth-coloured restorations due to their capacity to transmit light during the polymerization process.[8]
Mylar strip
Indications
Restoring Class lll and Class lV tooth preparation. [9]
When the neighbouring tooth possesses a flat contact area, the mylar strip can be applied employing a pull-through technique. [8]
Advantage
Easy to utilize
Cost-effective. [9]
Disadvantage
Flexibility of this matrix can pose difficulties in shaping large areas.
Ensuring stability of the matrix during restoration is a common concern. [10]
Bioclear matrix system
The Bioclear matrix system was pioneered by Dr. David Clark in 2007.[11]
Features
Excellent cervical adaptation, preservation of the gingival papilla, simplified matrix selection, and clear indication of the proper orientation by each matrix's incisal tab.
Indications
Aesthetic procedures involving small restoration areas.
Used for both anterior and posterior restorations.[8]
Transparent Crown
This is also referred as a strip crown.
Indications
Utilized in both primary and permanent dentition.
Used in treatment of microdontia in incisors or peg-shaped lateral incisors.[8]
Contoured anterior matrix
In this technique, a stainless-steel matrix band is taken and contorted into an 'S' shape using a mouth mirror handle.
Indications
To restore the distal portion of canine and premolar teeth.
Slot restorations for Class II cases.[9]
Blue view varistrip
It's a contoured anterior matrix designed to offer the optimum curvature and band height for all anterior restorations.
Indications[8]
Non- transparent matrix system
Unica anterior
It is developed through a collaboration between Polydentia and Style Italiano.
Indications
Features[8]
Unica minideep
It is particularly made from a malleable alloy that conforms to the required shape for smaller anterior teeth.
Indication [8]
Fusion anterior matrix system
Garrison Dental introduced the Fusion Anterior Matrix System.
Indications
Features[8]
Burtonbands anterior matrix system
They were designed by Dr. Matthew Burton.
Indications
Advantages
Complete accessibility to the restoration.
Ability to shape and ensure proper proximal contact through the burnishable nature and narrower profile of the metal matrix compared to plastic strips.[8]
Rigid matrix system
Modified putty index using mylar strip
A putty index of the incisors is created by using either the direct or indirect technique. This index is made using either addition or condensation silicone putty materials. [9]
Indications[12]
Limitations
A second appointment is necessary to have both the mylar strip and the index inserted together.
It necessitates the assistance of four hands.[13]
Posterior matrix system
Caries extending onto the proximal aspects of molars and premolars are categorized as class II caries. The establishment of proper contact and contour in such cases becomes a challenge for the dentists. In order to combat this hurdle, varieties of matrix systems had been developed.[7]
Posterior matrix system can be divided into:
On the basis of matrix retainers:
Depending on mode of retention
With retainer-Ivory no.1, Ivory no.8 etc.
Without retainer -Auto matrix, Compound supported etc.
Depending on the cavity preparation for which it is used
Class I cavity with buccal and lingual extension - Double banded Tofflemire matrix.
Class II cavity- Single banded Tofflemire matrix, Ivory no.1, Ivory no.8, Copper band matrix, T band matrix, Auto matrix and Pre countered sectional matrix.[7]
On basis of types of matrix available:
Custom-made or anatomic matrix - E.g. Compound- supported matrix.
Mechanical matrix- E.g. Ivory No.1, Ivory No.8, Tofflemire matrix.
Preformed - E.g. Circumferential matrix system, Sectional matrix system.[14]
Mechanical retainer
Ivory matrix No. 1
It consist of a matrix holder with two semicircular arms, one of which is slanted, and a claw at the end and also consist of screw, positioned opposite to the matrix band holder.[9]
Indications
Used for restoring unilateral class II restoration.[7]
Ivory matrix no. 8
This matrix comprises a band that wraps around the entire tooth crown. The band's circumference can be modified using the adjusting screw located in the retainer.[9]
Indications
For unilateral or bilateral Class II preparations (MOD).[7]
Tofflemire matrix
Also, referred to as the universal matrix, this design was pioneered by B.R. Tofflemire.[5]
Indications
Tooth preparations with buccal or lingual extensions under Class l.
Class II tooth preparations, either unilateral or bilateral.
Advantages:
Simple to utilize
Study and inherently stable
Offers excellent contact and contours
Easily removable
Applicable from both facial and lingual aspects
Cost-effective
Disadvantages:
Doesn't achieve optimal or straight contacts and contours for posterior composite restorations.[7]
Steele’s siqveland self-adjusting matrix holder
It's frequently employed for tapering teeth, particularly where there's significant difference between the diameters of the cervical and occlusal thirds of the tooth.
Indications
Various compound and complex tooth preparations in the posterior region.
Advantage
Able to conform accurately to tooth contours.
With Steele’s Siqveland self-adjusting matrix holder, achieving anatomical adaptation of the band is feasible without the need for wedges.[5]
Omni matrix
The Omni-Matrix (Ultradent) is a disposable matrix retainer with pre-loaded band.
Indications
Class V composite restorations.
Pivoting head allow it access any area of mouth.
Advantages
Simple and rapid in application.
Minimizes the risk of cross-infection.
Disadvantages
Costlier.[15]
Custom - made
Compound supported matrix
Sweeney provided the description of Compound supported matrix.
Indications
Restoring a Class II cavity preparation involving either one surface or both.
Cases where adjacent teeth is missing.
Advantages
Offers superior contact and contour.
Exceptionally rigid and stable.
Simple to remove.
Disadvantages
Time-consuming.[9]
T-Shaped matrix band
It's a preformed matrix band made of brass, copper, or stainless steel without a retainer.
Indications
Tooth preparations for unilateral or bilateral Class II (MOD) cases.
Advantages
Simple to use.
Cost-effective.
Disadvantages
Inherently unstable.[9]
Copper bands
These are cylindrical in shape and available in different sizes, hence can be selected accordingly.
Indications
Particularly suited for severely decayed teeth (especially pin amalgam restorations).
Ideal for Class II cavities with extensive buccal or lingual extensions.
Advantages
User-friendly
Offers excellent contours.
Disadvantages
Incompatible with resin restorations.
Requires a significant amount of time. [9]
Preformed
Auto matrix
The Auto-matrix or retainer-less matrix was given by L.D. Chaulk Co. Milford in 1977.
Indications
In inclined and partially erupted teeth.
For complex amalgam restorations.
In patients unable to tolerate retainers.
Advantages
Ease of use is enhanced by the absence of interference from a retainer.
Quick implementation.
Disadvantages
Proximal contouring poses a challenge as the bands lack pre-contouring.
High Cost. [7]
Circumferential matrix
Circumferential matrix can be of different types:-
Palodent 360 circumferential matrix system
The Palodent 360 is an innovative circumferential matrix system that doesn't require a retainer or applicator.
Indications
Beneficial for complex Class Il cases where adjacent teeth are absent, excessive tooth structure loss prohibits sectional matrix use, or when dealing with misaligned or severely rotated teeth.
Palodent 360 matrix bands along with Palodent Plus retention rings, provides temporary interproximal space. [7]
Meta-fix matrix system
It was manufactured by Kerr company.
Indications[16]
Sectional matrix
Sectional matrix system was introduced by Dr. Alvin Meyer in 1986
Indications
Suitable for minor to moderate Class II cavities affecting one or both proximal surfaces of the tooth.
Employed for both amalgam and composite material restorations.
Advantages
Easy to utilize with excellent visibility.
The anatomically contoured bands ensures ideal contact points and indentation. [7]
To achieve anatomically accurate contacts with posterior composites, it's essential to create enough space between the teeth in contact to accommodate both the thickness of the matrix band and the polymerization shrinkage of the composite resin. The introduction of "sectional matrices and contact rings" marked the initial effective solution for achieving proper posterior composite contacts. [17]
Basic Principle of Contact Rings
These rings function by creating a slight separation between adjacent teeth. They can be classified based on their development into two categories:
First generation systems and
Second-generation systems
First generation systems
The initial contact ring systems, emerging in the late 1990s, encompassed products such as the Palodent Bitine, Contact matrix, and the Composi-Tight. [1]
Problems with early contact rings
Risk of ring collapse or displacement with wide proximal boxes.
Ring stacking, wherein one ring is placed over another for MOD restoration.
Gradual loss of springiness due to repeated usage and sterilization.[17]
Second-generation systems
In response to the limitations of first-generation rings, recently introduced second-generation rings aim to overcome these issues. Examples include the Composi-Tight 3D Soft Face Ring System, Palodent Plus, Bioclear, V, V3, V3 Blue, and V4 Clear Metal Ring System. [1]
Instruments to Develop Ideal Contacts and Contours
Various strategies have been introduced to achieve optimal contacts and contours when performing direct posterior composite restorations. Noteworthy among these strategies are:
Contact forming instruments
Ceramic inserts
Light tips.[1]
Conclusion
A tooth is a dynamic, living organ made up of various tissues, constantly adapting to the forces of chewing and speech. When tooth tissue is lost due to factors like decay, injury, or wear, proper management is essential. Treating missing tooth structures offers dentists a wide array of techniques and materials, requiring a comprehensive understanding of the necessary tools and resources. To simplify the reconstruction of proximal contact surfaces, significant focus has been placed on developing various matrix systems. These systems aim to reduce the complexity associated with inserting different restorative materials.
Understanding about the different matrix systems, its techniques and advances helps the clinician to select the best matrix system for the specific clinical situation to achieve predictable contact and contours with the available restoration.
Source of Funding
None.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors have no financial interests or conflicts of interests.
References
- R Raghu, R Srinivasan. Optimizing tooth form with direct posterior composite restorations. J Conserv Dent 2011. [Google Scholar]
- C Johnson. . Textbook of operative dentistry 1938. [Google Scholar]
- AH Fee. Contacts and contours. J Am Dent Assoc 1940. [Google Scholar]
- JG Bauer, BJ Crispin. . Evolution of the matrix for Class 2 restorations. Operative Dentistry 1986. [Google Scholar]
- N Garg, A Garg. . Evolution of the matrix for class 2 restorations. Textbook of operative dentistry 2010. [Google Scholar]
- AT Shivakumar, SH Kalgeri, S Dhir. Clinical considerations in restorative dentistry-A narrative review. J Int Clin Dent Res Org 2015. [Google Scholar]
- V Patekar, N Mankar, K Burde, A Achanta. Choice of matrix system in dentistry: A review. J Dent Med Sci 2022. [Google Scholar]
- NK Urkande, N Mankar, PP Nikhade, M Chandak, A Ikhar, A Patel. Anterior matrix systems for composite restorations: A review. Cureus 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- R Raghu, SS Matrices. . Clinical operative dentistry principles and practice 2011. [Google Scholar]
- A Goyal, V Nikhil, R Singh. Diastema closure in anterior teeth using a posterior matrix. Case Rep Dent 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- D Clark. The bioclear matrix and peg lateral treatment. Inside Dent 2011. [Google Scholar]
- D Dietschi. Layering concepts in anterior composite restorations. J Adhes Dent 2001. [Google Scholar]
- BP Lesage. Aesthetic anterior composite restorations: A guide to direct placement. Dent Clin N Am 2007. [Google Scholar]
- A Marlynda. A Historical Review of Dental Matrices. Malays Dent J 2011. [Google Scholar]
- AS Gilmour, T James, S Bryant, A Gardner, D Stone, LD Addy. An in vitro study on the use of circumferential matrix bands in the placement of class II amalgam restorations. Br Dent J 2008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- P Vashisht, S Gupta, R Mittal. Latest trends in composite restoration matricing. Heal Talk 2014. [Google Scholar]
- TP Keogh, RL Bertolotti. Creating tight, anatomically correct interproximal contacts. Dent Clin N Am 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Introduction
- Discussion
- Matricing and Matrices
- Ideal requirements of dental matrices include
- Matrix system depending on location can be of two types
- Basic Principle of Contact Rings
- Instruments to Develop Ideal Contacts and Contours
- Conclusion
- Source of Funding
- Conflicts of Interest