Gamze Nazlı YANAR, Haluk BODUR

415120

Diş Hekimliğinde Kullanılan Güncel Matriks Sistemleri

Diş hekimliğinde sık görülen arayüz çürüklerinin restorasyonları destek doku eksikliği nedeni ile ek malzemelere ihtiyaç duyulan bölgelerdir. Arayüz restorasyonlarının anatomik forma uygun olması, diş eti sağlığının korunması ve sekonder çürük oluşumunun engellenmesi açısından önemlidir. Bölgede gıda retansiyonunun engellenebilmesi için komşu diş ile temaslar yüzey şeklinde oluşturulabilmeli, dolgu materyalinin servikal diş eti hizasında taşkınlıkları olmamalıdır. Arayüzlerin dolgu materyalleri ile şekillendirilmesi sırasında yapay bir duvar oluşturarak materyalin kondansasyonu sırasında taşkınlıkları engelleyen, doğal konturları oluşturmaya yardımcı, komşu diş ile uygun temas yüzeyleri oluşturulmasına izin veren matriks bantları kullanılmaktadır. Kuvvetli bir şekilde kondanse edilebilen amalgam dolguların yerini kondansasyonu daha zor olan kompozit rezinlerin alması ile beraber,matriks bantları da materyallere uygun şekilde geliştirilmiştir. Bu derlemede özellikle son yıllarda daha sık kullanılan, hasta başında dişlere özgü olarak şekillendirilip adapte edilen matriks bantları, tutucusu ile birlikte kullanılan çevresel matriks sistemleri, kesit matriks bantları, seperasyon halkaları ve kamalar ile bir bütün olan bölümlü matriks sistemleri ile ilgili güncel bilgiler sunulmuştur.
Anahtar Kelimeler:

matriks, restoratif, arayüz, kontakt yüzeyi

Current Matrix Systems Used in Dentistry

Interproximal caries lesions, which are frequently seen in dentistry, are areas where additional materials are needed during restorations due to the lack of supporting tissue. It is important that the interproximal restorations are suitable for the anatomical form, to protect the gingival health and to prevent the formation of secondary caries. In order to prevent food retention, contacts with the adjacent tooth should be created in the form of a surface, and the filling material should not overhang at the level of the cervical gingiva. During the shaping of the interproximal lesions with filling materials, matrix bands are used, which prevents marginal overhangs during the condensation of the material by forming an artificial wall, helps to create natural contours, and allows the creation of suitable contact surfaces with the adjacent tooth. With the replacement of strongly condensable amalgam fillings with composite resins, which are more difficult to condense, matrix bands have also been developed in accordance with the materials. In this review, matrix bands that are shaped and adapted at the chairside, circumferential matrix systems with retainers, sectional matrix bands, separation rings and wedges, which are used more frequently especially in recent years, are presented.
Keywords:

matrix, restorative, interproximal, proximal contact,

PDF

___

  • 1. Owens BM, Phebus JG. An evidence-based review of dental matrix systems. General Dentistry. 2016;64(5):64-70.
  • 2. Raghu R, Srinivasan R. Optimizing tooth form with direct posterior composite restorations. Journal of Conservative Dentistry. 2011;14(4):330.
  • 3. Kinoshita S, Wen, C.R. . Kinoshita’s Color Atlas of Periodontics. St Louis: Ishiyaku EuroAmerica; 1985.
  • 4. Loomans BAC. Proximal contact tightness of posterior composite resin restorations: [Sl: sn]; 2007.
  • 5. Nelson SJ. Wheeler’s Dental Anatomy, Physiology, and Occlusion. 10th edition ed. St Louis: Elsevier/ Saunders 2015.
  • 6. Hancock E, Mayo C, Schwab R, Wirthlin M. Influence of interdental contacts on periodontal status. Journal of Periodontology. 1980;51(8):445-9.
  • 7. Bauer JG, Crispin BJ. Evolution of the matrix for Class 2 restorations. Operative Dentistry. 1986:(4)1-37.
  • 8. Ghulman MA. Effect of cavity configuration (C factor) on the marginal adaptation of low-shrinking composite: a comparative ex vivo study. International Journal of Dentistry. 2011;2011.
  • 9. Kaplan I, Schuman NJ. Selecting a matrix for a Class II amalgam restoration. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1986;56(1):25-31.
  • 10. Klein F, Keller AK, Staehle HJ, Dörfer CE. Proximal contact formation with different restorative materials and techniques. American Journal of Dentistry. 2002;15(4):232-5.
  • 11. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Asscherickx K, Simon S, Abe Y, Lambrechts P, et al. Do condensable composites help to achieve better proximal contacts? Dental Materials. 2001;17(6):533-41.
  • 12. Puckett AD, Fitchie JG, Kirk PC, Gamblin J. Direct composite restorative materials. Dental Clinics of North America. 2007;51(3):659-75.
  • 13. Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Operative Dentistry. 2004;29:481-508.
  • 14. El-Shamy H, Saber M, Dörfer C, El-Badrawy W, Loomans B. Influence of volumetric shrinkage and curing light intensity on proximal contact tightness of class II resin composite restorations: in vitro study. Operative Dentistry. 2012;37(2):205-10.
  • 15. Dörfer CE, Schriever A, Heidemann D, Staehle HJ, Pioch T. Influence of rubberdam on the reconstruction of proximal contacts with adhesive tooth-colored restorations. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2001;3(2).
  • 16. Rau PJ, Pioch T, Staehle H-J, Dörfer CE. Influence of the rubber dam on proximal contact strengths. Operative Dentistry. 2006;31(2):171-5.
  • 17. Loomans B, Opdam N, Roeters F, Bronkhorst E, Burgersdijk R. Comparison of proximal contacts of Class II resin composite restorations in vitro. Operative Dentistry. 2006;31(6):688-93.
  • 18. Lawson NC, Janyavula S, Price RB. Trends in restorative dentistry: composites, curing lights and matrix bands. Compendium of continuing education in dentistry (Jamesburg, NJ: 1995). 2021;42(2):93-4.
  • 19. Lowe A, Bagg J, Burke F, MacKenzie D, McHugh S. A study of blood contamination of Siqveland matrix bands. British Dental Journal. 2002;192(1):43-5.
  • 20. Whitworth C, Davies K, Palmer N, Martin M. An investigation of the decontamination of Siqveland matrix bands. British Dental Journal. 2007;202(4):212- 221.
  • 21. Sibner JA. The Evolution of Matrix Systems for Composite Restorations. 2015 [cited 2022 14.02.2022]; Available from: http://archive.today/2022.02.14- 103801/https://dentalacademyofce.com/courses/2930/PDF/1509cei_Sibner_web.pdf
  • 22. Chuang S-F, Su K-C, Wang C-H, Chang C-H. Morphological analysis of proximal contacts in class II direct restorations with 3D image reconstruction. Journal of Dentistry. 2011;39(6):448-56.
  • 23. Garg, N., Garg, A. Textbook of Operative Dentistry. (third edition) New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2015;194-211.
  • 24. Waggoner WF, Nelson T. Restorative dentistry for the primary dentition. Pediatric Dentistry:3th edition, Elsevier; 2019;304-28.
  • 25. Lucifix. [cited; Available from: http://archive.today/2022.01.22- 164658/https://www.kerrdental.com/tr-tr/dental-restoratif-materyaller/lucifix-matrislerdental-restorasyonlara-yoenelik-aksesuarlar
  • 26. Metafix. [cited 22.01.2022]; Available from: http://archive.today/2022.01.22- 164235/https://www.kerrdental.com/tr-tr/dental-restoratif-materyaller/metafix-dentalrestorasyonlara-yoenelik-aksesuarlar
  • 27. Ayaz DF, Tağtekin D, Yanıkoğlu F. Güncel matris sistemlerine klinik yaklaşım. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi. 2011;2011(4):40-8.
  • 28. Mackenzie L, Shortall AC, Burke FT. Direct posterior composites: a practical guide. Dental Update. 2009;36(2):71-95.
  • 29. Davidson DF, Suzuki M. A prescription for the successful use of heavy filled composites in the posterior dentition. Journal of the Canadian Dental Association. 1999;65(5):256-60.
  • 30. Lopes GC, Vieira LCC, Araujo E. Direct composite resin restorations: a review of some clinical procedures to achieve predictable results in posterior teeth. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2004;16(1):19-31.
  • 31. Demarco FF, Cenci MS, Lima FG, Donassollo TA, de Almeida André D, Leida FL. Class II composite restorations with metallic and translucent matrices: 2-year follow-up findings. Journal of Dentistry. 2007;35(3):231-7.
  • 32. Bhatia HP, Sood S, Sharma N, Singh A, Rajagopal V. Comparative evaluation of clinical efficiency and patient acceptability toward the use of circumferential matrix and sectional matrix for restoration of Class II cavities in primary molars: an in vivo study. International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2021;14(6):748-51.
  • 33. Margolis F. S. Aesthetic dentistry for tots and teens. Dentistry Today 2010; 29(4), 110–113.
  • 34. Omni-matrix.[cited22.01.2022] Available from: http://archive.today/2022.01.22- 153927/https://www.ultradent.com/products/categories/prepare/matrix-systems/omnimatrix?group=6929
  • 35. Frankenberger R, Krämer N, Pelka M, Petschelt A. Internal adaptation and overhang formation of direct Class II resin composite restorations. Clinical Oral Investigations. 1999;3(4):208-15.
  • 36. Mullejans R, Badawi M, Raab W, Lang H. An in vitro comparison of metal and transparent matrices used for bonded class II resin composite restorations. Operative Dentistry. 2003;28(2):122-6.
  • 37. Opdam N, Roeters F, Feilzer A, Smale I. A radiographic and scanning electron microscopic study of approximal margins of Class II resin composite restorations placed in vivo. Journal of Dentistry. 1998;26(4):319-27.
  • 38. Loomans B, Opdam N, Roeters F, Bronkhorst E, Huysmans M. Restoration techniques and marginal overhang in Class II composite resin restorations. Journal of Dentistry. 2009;37(9):712-7.
  • 39. Loomans BA, Opdam NJ, Roeters FJM, Huysmans M-CD. Proximal marginal overhang of composite restorations in relation to placement technique of separation rings. Operative Dentistry. 2012;37(1):21-7.
  • 40. Liebenberg WH. The proximal precinct in direct posterior composite restorations: interproximal integrity. Practical Procedures & Aesthetic Dentistry. 2002;14(7):587-94; quiz 96.
  • 41. Tam C. The Garrison Composi-Tight® 3D XR Sectional Matrix System: Strength and Innovation.
  • 42. Ritter AV. Posterior composites revisited. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2008;20(1):57-67.
  • 43. Summitt JB, Robbins JW, Schwartz RS. Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry: a contemporary approach. 2001.
  • 44. Loomans BA, Opdam NJ, Roeters JF, Bronkhorst EM, Plasschaert AJ. Influence of composite resin consistency and placement technique on proximal contact tightness of Class II restorations. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2006;8(5).
  • 45. Saber MH, Loomans A, Zohairy AE, Dörfer CE, El-Badrawy W. Evaluation of proximal contact tightness of Class II resin composite restorations. Operative Dentistry. 2010;35(1):37-43.
  • 46. Loomans B, Opdam N, Roeters F, Bronkhorst E, Burgersdijk R, Dörfer C. A randomized clinical trial on proximal contacts of posterior composites. Journal of Dentistry. 2006;34(4):292-7.
  • 47. Nahar N, Bashar A, Gafur MA, Jeorge DH. Sectional matrix system in reconstruction of proximal contact in class ii resin restoration. Update Dental College Journal. 2021;11(2):16-9.
  • 48. Palodent V3.[cited22.01.2022]; Available from: http://archive.today/2022.01.22- 154528/https://assets.dentsplysirona.com/flagship/en/explore/restorative/palodentv3/ K79200238-00%20DS%20PV3%20Brochure%20A4.pdf
  • 49. De La Peña VA, García RP, García RP. Sectional matrix: Step-by-step directions for their clinical use. British Dental Journal. 2016;220(1):11-4.
  • 50. Lowe, Robert A. The use of sectional matrix systems in class II direct composite restorations. Dentistry Today. 2004, 23(10): 108, 110-2.
  • 51. Kurtzman GM. Improving proximal contours for direct resin restorations. Dentistry Today. 2010;29(4):106, 8-9.
  • 52. Cho SD, Browning WD, Walton KS. Clinical use of a sectional matrix and ring. Operative Dentistry. 2010;35(5):587-91.
  • 53. Rao A. Principles and Practice of Pedodontics. third edition, New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2012;247-248.
  • 54. LeSage B, Milnar F, Wohlberg J. Achieving the epitome of composite art: creating natural tooth esthetics, texture, and anatomy using appropriate preparation and layering techniques. Journal of Cosmetic Dentistry. 2008; 24 (3): 42. 2008;51.
  • 55. Fahl Jr N. Step-by-step approaches for anterior direct restorative challenges. Journal of Cosmetic Dentistry. 2011;26(4):42.
  • 56. Denehy GE. Simplifying the Class IV lingual matrix. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2005;17(5):312-9.
  • 57. Hofmann N, Hunecke A. Influence of curing methods and matrix type on the marginal seal of class II resin-based composite restorations in vitro. Operative Dentistry. 2006;31(1):97-105.
  • 58. Yazici AR, Tuncer D, Antonson S, Onen A, Kilinc E. Effects of delayed finishing/polishing on surface roughness, hardness and gloss of tooth-coloured restorative materials. European Journal of Dentistry. 2010;4(01):050-6.
  • 59. Schmedding T. Anterior matrix systems-essential to provide proper anatomical form and function to restorations. International Dentistry – African edition 2021;11(2), 48-50
  • 60. Amaro I, Saraiva J, Gomes AC, Araújo A, Marto CM, Coelho A, et al. Direct restorations for anterior esthetic rehabilitation and smile symmetry recovery: two case reports. 2021;13(10):1848.
  • 61. Unica Anterior Matrix.[cited2022.08.02]; Available from: http://archive.today/2022.02.08-100943/https://polydentia.ch/prodotto/matrice-unicaanterior/
  • 62. Hellie CM, Charbeneau GT, Craig RG, Brandau HE. Quantitative evaluation of proximal tooth movement effected by wedging: a pilot study. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1985;53(3):335-41.
  • 63. Wirsching E, Loomans BA, Klaiber B, Dörfer CE. Influence of matrix systems on proximal contact tightness of 2-and 3-surface posterior composite restorations in vivo. Journal of Dentistry. 2011;39(5):386-90.
  • 64. Peumans M, Venuti P, Politano G, Van Meerbeek B. Effective protocol for daily high-quality direct posterior composite restorations. The interdental anatomy of the class-2 composite restoration. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2021;23(1):21-34.
  • 65. Eli I, Weiss E, Kozlovsky A, Levi N. Wedges in restorative dentistry: principles and applications. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 1991;18(3):257-64.
  • 66. Burch JG. Periodontal considerations in operative dentistry. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1975;34(2):156-63
Uluslararası Diş Hekimliği Bilimleri Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 2149-8628
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 3 Sayı
  • Yayıncı: Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit Üniversitesi
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

ORTODONTİK TEDAVİ SONRASI SÜT KANİN DİŞİNİN ESTETİK REHABİLİTASYONU: OLGU SUNUMU

Fikret YILMAZ, Ayşenur ÇAKIR, Nursel ARICI

ÖN ISITMA İŞLEMİNİN CAM İYONOMER SİMANIN SERTLEŞME SÜRESİNE ETKİSİ

Ebru HAZAR BODRUMLU, Gözde ARSLAN

Periodontal Durum ve Maksiller Sinüs Hastalıkları Arasındaki İlişkinin Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Kullanılarak Değerlendirilmesi

Gediz GEDUK, Emre HAYLAZ, Çiğdem ŞEKER

İskeletsel Sınıf III Maloklüzyonun Yüz Maskesi ve Asimetrik Diş Çekimi ile Tedavisi: Vaka Raporu

İrem YOLCU, Büşra DEMİR ÇİÇEK, Orhan ÇİÇEK

SON KULLANMA TARİHİ GEÇEN VE GEÇMEMİŞ İKİ FARKLI KÖK KANAL PATININ SERTLİK DÜZEYLERİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Emre BODRUMLU, Şerife Büşra ARSLAN

Diş Hekimliğinde Kullanılan Güncel Matriks Sistemleri

Gamze Nazlı YANAR, Haluk BODUR