Novel Microscalpels for Removing Proximal Composite Resin Overhangs on Class II Restorations

Abstract

SUMMARY Introduction: Limited access to interdental spaces complicates removal of excess material when placing class II composite resin restorations. Evidence-based recommendations on interproximal finishing are rare. We present novel microscalpels for this indication. The aim of the study was to test their fracture strength and cutting ability and to compare microscalpels with the use of a scaler, oscillating devices (G5-ProShape, G5-Proxocare), finishing strips and scalpels of sizes 12, 15, and 21 in a standardized in vitro model. Methods and Materials: Fracture strength (LOAD) and cutting forces (CUT) of microscalpels were evaluated at different angles (15, 30, 60, and 75 degrees; n=30 each) in a universal testing machine. Devices were compared in vitro using standardized composite overhangs. Marginal quality (QUAL; n=30) and quantity of excess/deficit (QUAN; n=30) were evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for each device (explorative data analysis, Student t-test or analysis of variance; post hoc Scheffé). Results: Microscalpels showed the highest LOAD (95.8 [5.0] N) (mean [standard deviation]) and easiest cutting (CUT) (7.6 [1.5]) at 15 degrees. At all angles, LOAD was significantly higher than CUT (p<0.001). Perfect margins were seen most often with scalpel size 12 (QUAL: 37% relative frequency), while most excess (73.4%) was observed with finishing strips. QUAN was lowest with microscalpels (19.3 [4.4] μm) and highest with finishing strips (116.0 [18.8]). Use of scalers led to fractures and crack formation. Conclusion: Microscalpels are able to cut composite at a lower force than necessary to fracture the blades at all angles. Small and/or curved scalpels yield the best-quality margins.