Is a fiber post better than a metal post for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 103750
Author(s):  
Marielle Dias Martins ◽  
Rafael Binato Junqueira ◽  
Rodrigo Furtado de Carvalho ◽  
Mariane Floriano Lopes Santos Lacerda ◽  
Daniele Sorgatto Faé ◽  
...  
2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 309-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabrício Eneas Diniz Figueiredo ◽  
Paulo Ricardo Saquete Martins-Filho ◽  
André Luis Faria-e-Silva

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 5-12
Author(s):  
Arthur Furtado De Mendonça ◽  
Grace M. d E Souza ◽  
Bianca Furtado De Mendonça ◽  
Ayman Ellakwa

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the available literature to evaluate the clinical performance of different post systems for the rehabilitation of endodontically treated teeth (ETT). Clinical Significance: The loss of structural integrity of endodontically treated teeth usually requires the use of intra-radicular posts for the retention of the final restoration. The recent literature has reported controversial results regarding the clinical performance of different systems. Material and Methods: An electronic search restricted to the English language was performed up to May 31, 2020. Articles were selected if they met the following criteria: cohort studies and randomized clinical trials comparing the failure rate incidence between fiber and cast metal post, with a mean follow-up of 3 years. Results: 24 studies (14 cohort studies and 10 RCTs) published between 2000 and 2018 were included in this review. For cast metal posts, 210 cases were classified as failures (17.07%), and for fiber posts, 423 were classified as failures (10.6%). An unpaired t-test revealed that cast metal and fiber post values were not significantly different (p = 0.58) with the difference between means of 5.00 with 95% confidence of interval (-13.38 to 23.39). Four studies that presented cast metal and fiber posts groups were combined in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in the general failure analysis (risk ratio of 0.59 [95% CI: 0.30 to 1.18]; p = 0.13). Conclusions: Based on the present analysis results, the clinical performance of ETT restored with either cast metal- or fiber post-retained restorations presented similar results.


Polymers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 2251
Author(s):  
Maciej Zarow ◽  
Marzena Dominiak ◽  
Katarzyna Szczeklik ◽  
Louis Hardan ◽  
Rim Bourgi ◽  
...  

Various material properties are involved in the success of endodontically treated restorations. At present, restorative composites are commonly employed as core build-up materials. This study aimed to systematically review the literature to assess the effect of using composite core materials on the in vitro fracture of endodontically treated teeth. Two different reviewers screened the literature, up to June 2021, in five distinct electronic databases: PubMed (MedLine), Scopus, Scielo, ISI Web of Science, and EMBASE. Only in vitro studies reporting the effect of the use of composite core materials on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth were included. A meta-analysis was carried out using a software program (Review Manager v5.4.1; The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). The risk of bias in each study was assessed following the parameters of another systematic review. A total of 5016 relevant papers were retrieved from all databases. After assessing the title and abstract, five publications remained for qualitative analysis. From these, only three studies remained for meta-analysis. The fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth where a core build-up composite was used was statistically significantly higher than the control (p = 0.04). Most of the analyses showed a high heterogenicity. The in vitro evidence suggests that the composite core build-up with higher filler content tended to improve the fracture resistance of the endodontically treated teeth, in comparison with conventional composite resins. This research received no external funding. Considering that this systematic review was only carried out on in vitro papers, registration was not performed. Furthermore, there were no identified clinical studies assessing core build-up materials; therefore, more well-designed research on these materials is needed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 171-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cleidiel Aparecido Araujo LEMOS ◽  
Daniel Augusto de Faria ALMEIDA ◽  
Victor Eduardo de Souza BATISTA ◽  
Carol Cantieri MELLO ◽  
Fellippo Ramos VERRI ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated teeth depending on the selected restorative material and tooth situation to be restored. Objective To analyze by the two-dimensional finite element method the biomechanical behavior of different diameters in intraradicular posts and teeth with coronal remaining of 2mm. Material and method Six models were made with three types of posts, as follows: Glass fiber post, carbon fiber post, and cast metal post, both with diameter # 1 (1.1 mm in diameter) and # 2 (1.3 mm of diameter). The modeling was performed using the Rhinoceros 4.0 program. The FEMAP 10.2 and NEiNastran 9.2 programs were used to develop finite element models. The loading used was 100N for axial and oblique forces. The results were visualized using the von Mises stress map. The statistical analysis was made using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post-test, with a significance level of 5%. Result The oblique loading stress values were higher than the axial loading (p<0.001) for both situations. The glass fiber post showed the lowest concentrations of stress on both loads (p<0.001). The carbon fiber post presented significant difference compared to the cast metal post, only in the oblique load (p=0.007). The diameter did not increase the stress of the evaluated posts (p=0.302). Conclusion The fiber posts were more favorable for restoration of endodontically treated teeth; the increase of diameter did not influence the increase of tension; the oblique load was more harmful for both posts and tooth structure.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document