Comparison of proximal contact tightness and contour of bioclear biofit HD versus Composi-tight 3DXR matrix systems in Class-II composite restoration: A randomized clinical study

Q1 Medicine

Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research Pub Date : 2025-04-19 DOI:10.1016/j.jobcr.2025.04.005

Shreya Volety , Ajay Singh Rao , Karkala Venkappa Kishan , Nimisha C. Shah , Dikshit Solanki , Geetanjali Jain

{"title":"Comparison of proximal contact tightness and contour of bioclear biofit HD versus Composi-tight 3DXR matrix systems in Class-II composite restoration: A randomized clinical study","authors":"Shreya Volety , Ajay Singh Rao , Karkala Venkappa Kishan , Nimisha C. Shah , Dikshit Solanki , Geetanjali Jain","doi":"10.1016/j.jobcr.2025.04.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To assess proximal contact tightness and contour of two different sectional matrix systems in class-II direct composite restoration using newly designed assessment criteria.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>In a double-blinded randomized clinical trial, 62 class-II direct composite restorations were performed in 62 patients using <em>Composi-Tight 3DXR</em> (n = 31) and <em>Bioclear Biofit HD</em> matrix systems (n = 31). Proximal contact tightness and contour were assessed using a self-designed criterion. Statistical analysis utilized <em>Chi-Square</em> and <em>Independent sample t-test</em>, with P < 0.001 considered significant.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The mean ± sd score for clinical and radiographical evaluation of proximal contact tightness of the <em>Bioclear Biofit HD</em> group (1.06 ± 0.25) was statistically significant with a p-value (<0.001) compared to the <em>Composi-Tight 3DXR</em> group (2.39 ± 0.72).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The study found that the Bioclear Biofit HD matrix system demonstrated better proximal contact and contour than the <em>Composi-Tight 3DXR</em> Sectional Matrix System in Class-II direct composite restorations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16609,"journal":{"name":"Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research","volume":"15 4","pages":"Pages 696-702"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212426825000909","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To assess proximal contact tightness and contour of two different sectional matrix systems in class-II direct composite restoration using newly designed assessment criteria.

Materials and methods

In a double-blinded randomized clinical trial, 62 class-II direct composite restorations were performed in 62 patients using Composi-Tight 3DXR (n = 31) and Bioclear Biofit HD matrix systems (n = 31). Proximal contact tightness and contour were assessed using a self-designed criterion. Statistical analysis utilized Chi-Square and Independent sample t-test, with P < 0.001 considered significant.

Results

The mean ± sd score for clinical and radiographical evaluation of proximal contact tightness of the Bioclear Biofit HD group (1.06 ± 0.25) was statistically significant with a p-value (<0.001) compared to the Composi-Tight 3DXR group (2.39 ± 0.72).

Conclusion

The study found that the Bioclear Biofit HD matrix system demonstrated better proximal contact and contour than the Composi-Tight 3DXR Sectional Matrix System in Class-II direct composite restorations.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

biclear biofit HD与composite -tight 3DXR基质系统在ii类复合修复中的近端接触紧密度和轮廓度比较：一项随机临床研究

材料和方法在一项双盲随机临床试验中，使用Composi-Tight 3DXR（n = 31）和Bioclear Biofit HD基质系统（n = 31）为62名患者进行了62次II类直接复合树脂修复。使用自行设计的标准评估近端接触紧密度和轮廓。统计分析采用 Chi-Square 和独立样本 t 检验，认为 P < 0.001 具有显著性。结果 Bioclear Biofit HD 组临床和放射学评估近端接触紧密度的平均值（± sd）分（1.06 ± 0.25）与 Composlear Biofit HD 组相比具有显著性，P 值（< 0.001）与 Composi-Tight 3DXR 组（2.39 ± 0.72）相比具有统计学意义。结论该研究发现，在二类直接复合树脂修复体中，Bioclear Biofit HD 基质系统比 Composi-Tight 3DXR 切面基质系统显示出更好的近端接触和轮廓。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

0.00%

发文量

133

审稿时长

167 days

期刊介绍： Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research (JOBCR)is the official journal of the Craniofacial Research Foundation (CRF). The journal aims to provide a common platform for both clinical and translational research and to promote interdisciplinary sciences in craniofacial region. JOBCR publishes content that includes diseases, injuries and defects in the head, neck, face, jaws and the hard and soft tissues of the mouth and jaws and face region; diagnosis and medical management of diseases specific to the orofacial tissues and of oral manifestations of systemic diseases; studies on identifying populations at risk of oral disease or in need of specific care, and comparing regional, environmental, social, and access similarities and differences in dental care between populations; diseases of the mouth and related structures like salivary glands, temporomandibular joints, facial muscles and perioral skin; biomedical engineering, tissue engineering and stem cells. The journal publishes reviews, commentaries, peer-reviewed original research articles, short communication, and case reports.