Abstract
This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of circumferential matrix band (CMB) and sectional matrix band (SMB) systems in obtaining optimum proximal contact in class II composite restorations. This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024556368). Electronic databases were searched from January 1990 to April 2024 for studies assessing the effectiveness of circumferential and sectional matrix systems in obtaining optimum proximal contact in class II composite restorations. Quality assessment or risk of bias assessment of included studies was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) 2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through its domains using Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK). Six studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Quality assessment revealed a presence of moderate to low risk of bias. It was observed that sectional matrix band systems were superior and provided better results as compared to circumferential matrix band systems with regard to the parameters assessed. This study found the sectional matrix band system to be more effective than the circumferential system in achieving optimal proximal contact in class II posterior composite restorations. Sectional matrices with separation rings produced significantly tighter contacts. Although operator satisfaction was similar for both systems, the sectional matrix was deemed easier to use. Overall, the sectional matrix system is preferred for achieving stronger, more consistent proximal contacts in clinical settings.