Root canal posts for the restoration of root filled teeth

Bolla, Michèle Muller; Muller‐Bolla, Michèle; Borg, Cybele; Lupi-Pégurier, Laurence; Laplanche, Olivier; Leforestier, Eric

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004623.pub2

Cited by 50 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent reviews on the literature have demonstrated that the clinical performance of non-metal fibre posts is better than that of metal ones, either cast or prefabricated (59)(60)(61). Recent reviews on the literature have demonstrated that the clinical performance of non-metal fibre posts is better than that of metal ones, either cast or prefabricated (59)(60)(61).…”

Section: Postsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success rates of prosthetic restorations on endodontically treated teeth; a systematic review after 6 years

Ploumaki

Bilkhair

Tuna

et al. 2013

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this systematic review were to investigate the success rates of prosthetic restorations on endodontically treated teeth and their manner of failure. PubMed and hand literature searches were conducted on studies published until June 2012. Only clinical studies on human subjects referring to the success rates of prosthetic restorations on endodontically treated teeth with a follow-up period of at least 6 years were reviewed. A total of four studies were identified. Meta-analysis showed the success rate to be 92% (CI 82-98%) for single crowns on endodontically treated teeth and 79% (72-86%) for fixed dental prostheses. Only one study reported on removable dental prostheses with a success rate of 66%. Single crowns on teeth restored without posts demonstrated a success rate of 94% (CI 84-99%), whereas where posts were placed, the success rate was lower (92% CI 82-98%). Single crowns over cast post-and-cores and prefabricated posts showed success rates of 93% (CI 82-99%) and 94% (CI 90-97%), respectively; both differences were not statistically significant (significance level of 5%). The most common reason for failure was post-debonding. Single crowns seem to be the best treatment modality for endodontically treated teeth. However, due to the low number of studies included and their design, the results of this systematic review should be interpreted with caution. Further clinical studies are needed to provide high-quality evidence on the topic.

show abstract

Section: Postsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success rates of prosthetic restorations on endodontically treated teeth; a systematic review after 6 years

Ploumaki

Bilkhair

Tuna

et al. 2013

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2,7 Evidence regarding the most adequate type of post to restore pulpless teeth remains controversial and this issue is still a major concern in dentistry. 8 Although several observational studies have evaluated the clinical behavior of intra-radicular retainers, they have inherent methodological limitations that restrict direct clinical applicability. Furthermore, most clinical studies are based on retrospective data, without control of the baseline conditions upon which the study was performed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical performance and failure modes of pulpless teeth restored with posts: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this systematic review was to compare the clinical performance and failure modes of teeth restored with intra-radicular retainers. A search was performed on PubMed/Medline, Central and ClinicalTrials databases for randomized clinical trials comparing clinical behavior and failures of at least two types of retainers. From 341 detected papers, 16 were selected for full-text analysis, of which 9 met the eligibility criteria. A manual search added 2 more studies, totalizing 11 studies that were included in this review. Evaluated retainers were fiber (prefabricated and customized) and metal (prefabricated and cast) posts, and follow-up ranged from 6 months to 10 years. Most studies showed good clinical behavior for evaluated intra-radicular retainers. Reported survival rates varied from 71 to 100% for fiber posts and 50 to 97.1% for metal posts. Studies found no difference in the survival among different metal posts and most studies found no difference between fiber and metal posts. Two studies also showed that remaining dentine height, number of walls and ferrule increased the longevity of the restored teeth. Failures of fiber posts were mainly due to post loss of retention, while metal post failures were mostly related to root fracture, post fracture and crown and/or post loss of retention. In conclusion, metal and fiber posts present similar clinical behavior at short to medium term follow-up. Remaining dental structure and ferrule increase the survival of restored pulpless teeth. Studies with longer follow-up are needed.

show abstract

“…Researchers in several studies have reported that preformed posts of either metal or fiber and composite to have more favorable endodontic and restorative outcomes when compared with cast metal, 19,28–30 and the authors of a related Cochrane Review reported fewer clinical failures with nonmetal posts. 19 Our finding of increased restorative failure rates in younger patients and patients of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity was unexpected. Investigators in one study reported decreased survival rates of endodontically treated and restored teeth with older patient age, although this study involved patients in a dental school.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Restorative outcomes for endodontically treated teeth in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning Network

Spielman¹,

Schaffer²,

Cohen³

et al. 2012

The Journal of the American Dental Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The authors aimed to determine the outcome of and factors associated with success and failure of restorations in endodontically treated teeth in patients in practices participating in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network. Methods Practitioner-investigators (P-Is) invited the enrollment of all patients seeking care at participating practices who had undergone primary endodontic therapy and restoration in a permanent tooth three to five years earlier. P-Is classified endodontically reated teeth as restorative failures if the restoration was replaced, the restoration needed replacement or the tooth was cracked or fractured. Results P-Is from 64 practices enrolled in the study 1,298 eligible patients who had endodontically treated teeth that had been restored. The mean (standard deviation) time to follow-up was 3.9 (0.6) years. Of the 1,298 enrolled teeth, P-Is classified 181 (13.9 percent; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 12.1–15.8 percent) as restorative failures: 44 (3.4 percent) due to cracks or fractures, 57 (4.4 percent) due to replacement of the original restoration for reasons other than fracture and 80 (6.2 percent) due to need for a new restoration. When analyzing the results by means of multivariate logistic regression, the authors found a greater risk of restorative failure to be associated with canines or incisors and premolars (P = .04), intracoronal restorations (P < .01), lack of preoperative proximal contacts (P < .01), presence of periodontal connective-tissue attachment loss (P < .01), younger age (P = .01), Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (P = .04) and endodontic therapy not having been performed by a specialist (P = .04). Conclusions These results suggest that molars (as opposed to other types of teeth), full-coverage restorations, preoperative proximal contacts, good periodontal health, non-Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, endodontic therapy performed by a specialist and older patient age are associated with restorative success for endodontically treated teeth in general practice. Clinical Implications These results contribute to the clinical evidence base to help guide practitioners when planning the restoration of endodontically treated teeth.

show abstract

Root canal posts for the restoration of root filled teeth

Cited by 50 publications

References 31 publications

Success rates of prosthetic restorations on endodontically treated teeth; a systematic review after 6 years

Success rates of prosthetic restorations on endodontically treated teeth; a systematic review after 6 years

Clinical performance and failure modes of pulpless teeth restored with posts: a systematic review

Restorative outcomes for endodontically treated teeth in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning Network

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About