FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2012164946> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2012164946 endingPage "591" @default.
• W2012164946 startingPage "587" @default.
• W2012164946 abstract "After a series of dramatic improvements in wear resistance, strength and ability to bond to dentin, resin composites have been used increasingly by clinicians for restoring Class I and II cavity preparations. Unlike amalgam, resin composites cannot always be formed effectively against the traditional matrix band to create optimal contacts.Several techniques have been introduced to achieve an optimal proximal contact. The examples are sectional matrix and ring, the Contact Pro hand instrument and use of Beta quartz glass ceramic inserts.1 Pre-wedging, where a wedge is inserted and pressed very firmly into the proximal space prior to preparing the tooth, is another recommended technique.2 Packable high-viscosity resin composites have been tested in vitro. The use of packable resin did not result in tighter proximal contacts when compared to the medium-viscosity hybrid resin composites.3–5A number of studies used a special measuring device, called the Tooth Pressure Meter,6 to quantify proximal contact tightness. In both in vitro and in vivo studies, a sectional matrix, in conjunction with the separation ring, was shown to result in increased proximal contacts relative to that which existed preoperatively. On the other hand, these same studies found that the proximal contacts were lighter than those that existed preoperatively when the traditional matrix band with Tofflemire and wedge were used. These studies supported use of the sectional matrix with separating ring in order to achieve tight contacts.7–8The metal matrix and Mylar strip were compared in an in vitro study for Class II resin composite restorations. The Mylar strip resulted in significantly higher amounts of excess material at the restoration margins when compared with metal matrices.9 Another study found that a separation ring used with both traditional circumferential and sectional matrices improved proximal contacts.10It is widely accepted that proximal contacts are very important features in healthy teeth. A lack of proximal contacts contributes to food impaction, secondary caries, tooth movement and periodontal complications.11 Even though the optimal level of tightness is not yet identified, it is most desirable to restore the tooth back to the situation1 prior to treatment. From the available literature, the sectional matrix with separation ring seems to be the most reliable device for restoring proximal contacts in posterior teeth.7–10 Originally, sectional matrix systems consisted of rings with simple tines. The Palodent Sectional Matrix (Darway, Inc, San Mateo, CA, USA) and the G-Ring (Garrison Dental Solutions, Inc, Spring Lake, MI, USA) are representative examples. More recently, the tines have been redesigned to be V-shaped to fit into the buccal and lingual embrasures. Examples of this design would be Omni-Matrix Sectional Matrix (Ultradent Products, Inc, South Jordan UT, USA) and the original V-Ring (Triodent, Katikati, New Zealand). More recently, the Composi Tight 3D Ring (Garrison Dental Solutions, Inc) and the V3-Ring (Triodent) matrix rings have included a silicon coating on the V-shaped tines. This article describes one of the currently available systems for assuring appropriate proximal contacts using the V-3 ring when restoring the proximal contacts of posterior teeth.The V3 Sectional Matrix System (Table 1) is one type of sectional matrix system. It includes the V3 Ring, V3 Matrices and Wave-Wedges. There are two sizes of rings: the universal green and the narrow yellow rings. Special forceps are used to apply the separating rings, while the Pin Tweezers are used for placing the Wave-Wedge and adapting the matrices to the preparation.12Step 1: A rubber dam was placed. The “pre-wedging” method was used prior to the preparation. The circle end of the wedge was grasped and the wedges inserted interproximally (Figures 1 and 2).Step 2: The preparation was completed while the wedges were pressed firmly in the interproximal spaces (Figure 3).Step 3: The matrices were grasped using the occlusal tab and slid interproximally. The occlusal tabs were folded on the marginal ridges of the adjacent teeth. The forceps were then used to place the rings occlusal to the wedges (Figures 4, 5 and 6). The buccal view of another case is shown to illustrate how the rings sit occlusally to the wedges (Figure 7).Step 4: After resin placement, the rings were removed with forceps. Both the wedges and the matrices were removed. The holes on the buccal and lingual ends of the matrix (Figure 4) allowed the clinician to grasp the bands and remove them easily.Step 5: The restoration was checked for optimal proximal contacts and finished (Figure 8). The occlusion was checked and modified, as necessary, then the restoration was polished. The complete restoration, immediately after removal of the rubber dam, is shown (Figure 9).This technique allows the clinician to restore Class II preparations in proper form and function. The minimal excess of resin at the buccal and lingual margins reduces the time required for finishing the restorations. The optimal proximal contacts, proper contour and heights are important factors in the longevity of Class II resin composite restorations." @default.
• W2012164946 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2012164946 creator A5011521802 @default.
• W2012164946 creator A5079629880 @default.
• W2012164946 creator A5087897477 @default.
• W2012164946 date "2010-09-01" @default.
• W2012164946 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2012164946 title "Clinical Use of a Sectional Matrix and Ring" @default.
• W2012164946 cites W2002719436 @default.
• W2012164946 cites W2004618850 @default.
• W2012164946 cites W2100503546 @default.
• W2012164946 cites W2106166066 @default.
• W2012164946 cites W2110068730 @default.
• W2012164946 cites W2143487244 @default.
• W2012164946 doi "https://doi.org/10.2341/09-338-t" @default.
• W2012164946 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20945751" @default.
• W2012164946 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2012164946 type Work @default.
• W2012164946 sameAs 2012164946 @default.
• W2012164946 citedByCount "6" @default.
• W2012164946 countsByYear W20121649462013 @default.
• W2012164946 countsByYear W20121649462016 @default.
• W2012164946 countsByYear W20121649462019 @default.
• W2012164946 countsByYear W20121649462021 @default.
• W2012164946 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2012164946 hasAuthorship W2012164946A5011521802 @default.
• W2012164946 hasAuthorship W2012164946A5079629880 @default.
• W2012164946 hasAuthorship W2012164946A5087897477 @default.
• W2012164946 hasBestOaLocation W20121649461 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C104779481 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C106487976 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C147789679 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C159985019 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C17525397 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C199343813 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C2779263046 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C2781431781 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C3019280483 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C47422493 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C51795115 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C104779481 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C106487976 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C147789679 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C159985019 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C17525397 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C185592680 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C192562407 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C199343813 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C2524010 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C2779263046 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C2781431781 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C3019280483 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C33923547 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C47422493 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C51795115 @default.
• W2012164946 hasConceptScore W2012164946C71924100 @default.
• W2012164946 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2012164946 hasLocation W20121649461 @default.
• W2012164946 hasLocation W20121649462 @default.
• W2012164946 hasOpenAccess W2012164946 @default.
• W2012164946 hasPrimaryLocation W20121649461 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W1992445414 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2004857997 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2066335823 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2105425537 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2432560430 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2439670014 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2440377560 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2498423658 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W2519476213 @default.
• W2012164946 hasRelatedWork W3158910505 @default.
• W2012164946 hasVolume "35" @default.
• W2012164946 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2012164946 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2012164946 magId "2012164946" @default.
• W2012164946 workType "article" @default.