# 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

## TL;DR

This study compares two dental matrix systems for their effectiveness in creating tight proximal contacts in composite restorations.

## Contribution

A new assessment criterion was developed to evaluate proximal contact tightness and contour in Class-II restorations.

## Key findings

- Bioclear Biofit HD showed significantly better proximal contact tightness than Composi-Tight 3DXR.
- The study used a self-designed clinical and radiographical evaluation method for comparison.
- Results were statistically significant with a p-value < 0.001.

## Abstract

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

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.

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).

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.

Image 1