Clinical considerations in restorative dentistry – A Narrative Review
by Shivakumar, Ashwini Tumkur; Kalgeri, Sowmya Halasabalu; Dhir,Sangeeta
Excerpts from the paper:
Restoring the proper anatomy of the tooth and maintaining the health of the soft tissue should be a prime consideration during the restorative procedure. This article reviews the clinical considerations that need to be adopted while restoring a natural tooth and or implant restoration.
Re-establishing the anatomy of the tooth Contact and contours
Establishing interproximal contact is the primary objective of restorative procedures. Ideal Proximal contact acts as a barrier against food impaction and thus contributes to underlying periodontal health. By providing food spillways and facilitating hygienic cleaning.
Improper restoration in the contact area will cause displacement of the teeth, lifting forces of the teeth, rotation of the teeth, deflecting occlusal contact, and food impaction.
How To: Marginal Ridge Heights in Class II Restorations | Tips from Dr. Lincoln Harris
In this video, Dr. Lincoln Harris shares tips and tricks for avoiding this common problem. He explains the factors contributing to high marginal ridges and demonstrates how to get the matrix height just right.
Creating Interproximal Contacts with Direct Restorations Presented by Javier Quirós, DDS
In this Tip of the Month video, Dr. Quirós shares a quick tip on creating great contacts in posterior restorations. Dr. Quirós uses matrices and composite to turn Class II restorations into easy Class I’s.
Influence of composite resin consistency and placement technique on proximal contact tightness of Class II restorations
by Bas A C Loomans, Niek J M Opdam, Joost F M Roeters, Ewald M Bronkhorst, Alphons J M Plasschaert
Results: The use of medium- or high-viscosity instead of a low-viscosity composite resin resulted in statistically significantly tighter proximal contacts (p < 0.01). The use of a separation ring resulted in a large, statistically significant increase (p < 0.001) in contact tightness. In contrast, the use of a hand instrument resulted in a small, statistically significant increase in contact tightness (p = 0.017). No statistically significant differences were found when a dead-soft matrix or a sectional matrix was used instead of a Tofflemire (p = 0.159, p = 0.261, resp.).
Conclusion: The use of a separation ring when restoring a Class II composite resin restoration has a greater influence on the obtained proximal