Skip to content
Research Article Open access CC BY 4.0

Effect of Matrix Systems and Filling Materials on Proximal Contacts in Primary Molar Restorations: An In vitro Study

Ralitsa Bogovska-Gigova, Krasimir Hristov

Asian Journal of Dental Sciences · pp. 22–30 · Published 13 Jan 2025

10.9734/ajds/2025/v8i1220

Abstract

Aim: This study evaluated the influence of the matrix system and filling material on the proximal wall morphology and contact tightness in Class II restorations of primary molars. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University of Sofia, Bulgaria, between September 2024 and December 2024. Methodology: On 240-second primary molars, occlusal-medial and occlusal-distal class II cavities with dimensions of 3x4x2 mm (buccolingual, occlusal-gingivally, and mesiodistally) were prepared. The teeth were then divided into six groups (40 teeth each) and were restored with different filling materials (compomer or bulk fill composite) and different matrix systems (sectoral and circumferential). The contact tightness of the proximal restorations was examined by inserting a different number of metal flat matrices with a thickness of 0.05 mm. Visually, the surface profile of the contact morphology was assessed and classified as flat, convex, or concave. Their marginal adaptation was also evaluated according to the following criteria: presence of a step and/or voids. The examination was performed under a dental microscope. Results: The palodent matrix system provided the tightest contacts to first primary molars when using compomer material, while the myJuniorKit system excelled with bulk-fill composites. For the first permanent molars 36 and 46, the junior matrix system consistently provided the tightest contacts, irrespective of the restorative material. A convex restoration profile is typically observed with the myJunior matrix system, while a flat profile is usually seen with the circumferential matrix system. There is a risk of void formation when using condensable filling materials but not when using bulk-fill material. Conclusion: The effectiveness of the proximal contour of primary teeth restorations is influenced more by the type of matrix system used than by the filling material or filling technique. Using sectional matrix systems designed explicitly for primary teeth (MuJuniorKit) significantly improves the proximal contacts of Class II composite restorations in primary molars. Circumferential matrices have a higher risk of edge formation than sectional matrices, and a higher risk of void formation is seen with compomers and layering restoration techniques.

Primary molars proximal restorations matrix systems contact tightness

References (19)

  1. 1 Restorations in primary teeth: a systematic review on survival and reasons for failures [DOI]
  2. 2 Influence of matrix systems on proximal contact tightness of 2- and 3-surface posterior composite restorations in vivo [DOI]
  3. 3 Morphological analysis of proximal contacts in class II direct restorations with 3D image reconstruction [DOI]
  4. 4 Longevity of posterior restorations in primary teeth: Results from a paediatric dental clinic [DOI]
  5. 5 Optimizing tooth form with direct posterior composite restorations [DOI]
  6. 6 Proposed classification for interproximal contacts of primary molars using CBCT: a pilot study [DOI]
  7. 7 Restorative treatment of primary teeth: an evidence‐based narrative review [DOI]
  8. 8 Evaluation of the proximal contact tightness in class II resin composite restorations using different contact forming instruments: a 1-year randomized controlled clinical trial [DOI]
  9. 9 Morphological assessment of the surface profile, mesiodistal diameter, and contact tightness of Class II composite restorations using three matrix systems: An in vitro study [DOI]
  10. 10 Clinical evaluation of proximal contacts of Class II esthetic direct restorations.
  11. 11 In vivo and in vitro evaluation of Class II composite resin restorations with different matrix systems.
  12. 12 Influence of Volumetric Shrinkage and Curing Light Intensity on Proximal Contact Tightness of Class II Resin Composite Restorations: In Vitro Study [DOI]
  13. 13 Reasons for direct restoration failure from childhood to adolescence: A birth cohort study [DOI]
  14. 14 A randomized controlled clinical trial of glass carbomer restorations in Class II cavities in primary molars: 12-month results. [DOI]
  15. 15 Interproximal contact areas of primary molars based on OXIS classification – a two centre cross sectional study [DOI]
  16. 16 Restoration of Proximal Contacts in Decayed Primary Molars Using Three Different Matrix Systems in Children Aged 5–9 Years: An In Vivo Study [DOI]
  17. 17 Quality of approximal surfaces of posterior restorations in primary molars [DOI]
  18. 18 Successful Restoration of Load-Bearing Cavities in Posterior Teeth with Direct-Replacement Resin-Based Composite [DOI]
  19. 19 Morphological Assessment of Proximal Restoration Depending on Different Matrix Systems in Primary Molars with a 3D Scanner: In Vitro Studies [DOI]

Cited by 6

Art of Contouring: A Comprehensive Review on the Evolution of Matrix Band Systems in Pediatric Dentistry

Darshana Sethia, Anandamoy Bagchi, Kanika S Dhull · World Journal of Dentistry · 2026

The Evaluation of Restored Proximal Contact Areas with Four Direct Adherent Biomaterials: An In Vitro Study

Elena-Cristina Marcov, Mihai Burlibașa, Narcis Marcov · Journal of Functional Biomaterials · 2025

Showing 2 of 6 known citations — external sources report more than can currently be individually listed.

Related research

Article metrics

Real usage data collected on this platform.

38

Page views

0

PDF downloads

6

Outbound clicks

6

Citations

Views over time

Views by country

Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".

Traffic sources

Referring site, by host.

Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.