Luanne Mara Rodrigues de Matos PhD, Marcelo Lopes Silva MDS, Thais Oliveira Cordeiro MDS, Sarah de Araujo Mendes Cardoso DDS, Débora e Silva Campos PhD, Isis Araújo Ferreira de Muniz PhD, Suelen Aline de Lima Barros MS, Paulo Isaias Seraidarian DDS
{"title":"牙髓治疗后牙齿修复的临床和实验室表现:系统综述。","authors":"Luanne Mara Rodrigues de Matos PhD, Marcelo Lopes Silva MDS, Thais Oliveira Cordeiro MDS, Sarah de Araujo Mendes Cardoso DDS, Débora e Silva Campos PhD, Isis Araújo Ferreira de Muniz PhD, Suelen Aline de Lima Barros MS, Paulo Isaias Seraidarian DDS","doi":"10.1111/jerd.13225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review aimed to analyze the clinical (survival rate, failure risk, or fracture) and laboratory performance (fracture mode or failure) of rehabilitations of endodontically treated teeth, with and without posts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A systematic search was conducted in the Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and OpenGrey databases up to March 2023, according to PRISMA guidelines. In vitro and clinical studies that compared the clinical and laboratory performance of endodontically treated teeth with and without intraradicular posts were included. Studies selection, data extraction, and risk of bias analysis were performed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty-one in vitro and 7 clinical studies were included. For in vitro studies, fiberglass post (<i>n</i> = 24) was the most mentioned. The follow-up time of the clinical studies ranged from 1 to 17 years, with the fiber-reinforced composite post (<i>n</i> = 3) being the most evaluated, and only failure risk proved to be more favorable for using intraradicular posts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Rehabilitations of endodontically treated teeth with and without intraradicular retainers showed no difference in fracture resistance and failure mode, evaluated by in vitro studies. Clinical studies showed no difference in survival rate, but failure risk proved to be more favorable for the use of posts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Clinical Significance</h3>\n \n <p>This analysis revealed significant variability between results, however, most laboratory and clinical studies revealed no difference with using the post. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize the need to evaluate the coronary remnant and the general characteristics of the tooth in each situation.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15988,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical and laboratorial performance of rehabilitation of endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Luanne Mara Rodrigues de Matos PhD, Marcelo Lopes Silva MDS, Thais Oliveira Cordeiro MDS, Sarah de Araujo Mendes Cardoso DDS, Débora e Silva Campos PhD, Isis Araújo Ferreira de Muniz PhD, Suelen Aline de Lima Barros MS, Paulo Isaias Seraidarian DDS\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jerd.13225\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>This systematic review aimed to analyze the clinical (survival rate, failure risk, or fracture) and laboratory performance (fracture mode or failure) of rehabilitations of endodontically treated teeth, with and without posts.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A systematic search was conducted in the Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and OpenGrey databases up to March 2023, according to PRISMA guidelines. In vitro and clinical studies that compared the clinical and laboratory performance of endodontically treated teeth with and without intraradicular posts were included. Studies selection, data extraction, and risk of bias analysis were performed.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Thirty-one in vitro and 7 clinical studies were included. For in vitro studies, fiberglass post (<i>n</i> = 24) was the most mentioned. The follow-up time of the clinical studies ranged from 1 to 17 years, with the fiber-reinforced composite post (<i>n</i> = 3) being the most evaluated, and only failure risk proved to be more favorable for using intraradicular posts.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Rehabilitations of endodontically treated teeth with and without intraradicular retainers showed no difference in fracture resistance and failure mode, evaluated by in vitro studies. Clinical studies showed no difference in survival rate, but failure risk proved to be more favorable for the use of posts.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Clinical Significance</h3>\\n \\n <p>This analysis revealed significant variability between results, however, most laboratory and clinical studies revealed no difference with using the post. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize the need to evaluate the coronary remnant and the general characteristics of the tooth in each situation.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15988,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jerd.13225\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jerd.13225","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical and laboratorial performance of rehabilitation of endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review
Objective
This systematic review aimed to analyze the clinical (survival rate, failure risk, or fracture) and laboratory performance (fracture mode or failure) of rehabilitations of endodontically treated teeth, with and without posts.
Materials and Methods
A systematic search was conducted in the Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and OpenGrey databases up to March 2023, according to PRISMA guidelines. In vitro and clinical studies that compared the clinical and laboratory performance of endodontically treated teeth with and without intraradicular posts were included. Studies selection, data extraction, and risk of bias analysis were performed.
Results
Thirty-one in vitro and 7 clinical studies were included. For in vitro studies, fiberglass post (n = 24) was the most mentioned. The follow-up time of the clinical studies ranged from 1 to 17 years, with the fiber-reinforced composite post (n = 3) being the most evaluated, and only failure risk proved to be more favorable for using intraradicular posts.
Conclusion
Rehabilitations of endodontically treated teeth with and without intraradicular retainers showed no difference in fracture resistance and failure mode, evaluated by in vitro studies. Clinical studies showed no difference in survival rate, but failure risk proved to be more favorable for the use of posts.
Clinical Significance
This analysis revealed significant variability between results, however, most laboratory and clinical studies revealed no difference with using the post. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize the need to evaluate the coronary remnant and the general characteristics of the tooth in each situation.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry (JERD) is the longest standing peer-reviewed journal devoted solely to advancing the knowledge and practice of esthetic dentistry. Its goal is to provide the very latest evidence-based information in the realm of contemporary interdisciplinary esthetic dentistry through high quality clinical papers, sound research reports and educational features.
The range of topics covered in the journal includes:
- Interdisciplinary esthetic concepts
- Implants
- Conservative adhesive restorations
- Tooth Whitening
- Prosthodontic materials and techniques
- Dental materials
- Orthodontic, periodontal and endodontic esthetics
- Esthetics related research
- Innovations in esthetics