Graduate Program in Dentistry, Meridional Faculty (IMED), 304 Senador Pinheiro Machado Street, 99070-220, Passo Fundo, Brazil; Graduate Program in Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, 457 Gonçalves Chaves Street, Pelotas, Brazil.
Graduate Program in Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, 457 Gonçalves Chaves Street, Pelotas, Brazil.
J Dent. 2020 May;96:103334. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103334. Epub 2020 Apr 14.
This study aimed to assess the survival and success of glass fiber posts compared to cast metal posts in teeth without ferrule.
An equivalency, prospective, double-blind (patient and outcome evaluator) randomized controlled trial (RCT) with parallel groups was designed to compare the clinical performance of cast metal and glass fiber posts cemented in endodontically treated teeth without ferrule (NCT01461239). Teeth were randomly allocated to the glass fiber or cast-metal post groups. All teeth were restored with single metal-ceramic crowns. Kaplan-Meier analysis with the log-rank test was used to test the success and survival between glass fiber and cast metal posts considering a cut-off value of P = 0.05. The annual failure rates were calculated considering the survival data for all restorations and separated by type of post after five years.
A hundred and nineteen patients and 183 posts (72 cast metal posts and 111 glass fiber posts) were analyzed. The median follow-up was 62 months (IQR 37-81). The log-rank test for success (P = 0.26) and survival (P = 0.63) analyses did not present statistically significant differences. The AFR of both posts after 5 years was 1.5%. Considering the posts separately and after 5 years, cast metal posts presented AFR of 1.2% and glass fiber posts AFR of 1.7%. Most failures were in posterior teeth (16/23), 10 failures were classified as root fractures and 5 as post debonding. The follow-up rate was 95.3%.
Glass fiber and cast metal posts showed good and similar clinical performance.
Results of this randomized controlled trial can help dentists to answer how the best technique to rehabilitate endodontically treated teeth with no remaining coronal wall.
本研究旨在评估无金属箍的牙中玻璃纤维桩与铸造金属桩的存活率和成功率。
设计了一项等效性、前瞻性、双盲（患者和结果评估者）随机对照试验（RCT），平行组比较无金属箍的根管治疗牙中铸造金属和玻璃纤维桩的临床性能（NCT01461239）。牙齿随机分配到玻璃纤维或铸造金属桩组。所有牙齿均用单金属-陶瓷冠修复。采用 Kaplan-Meier 分析和对数秩检验，考虑 P 值截值为 0.05，比较玻璃纤维和铸造金属桩的成功率和存活率。考虑所有修复体的生存数据，并按桩类型在五年后分开，计算每年的失败率。
119 名患者和 183 个桩（72 个铸造金属桩和 111 个玻璃纤维桩）被分析。中位随访时间为 62 个月（IQR 37-81）。成功（P=0.26）和生存（P=0.63）分析的对数秩检验未显示出统计学差异。两种桩在 5 年后的 AFR 均为 1.5%。单独考虑两种桩，5 年后铸造金属桩的 AFR 为 1.2%，玻璃纤维桩的 AFR 为 1.7%。大多数失败发生在后牙（16/23），10 例失败归类为根折，5 例为桩脱粘。随访率为 95.3%。
玻璃纤维和铸造金属桩表现出良好且相似的临床性能。
这项随机对照试验的结果可以帮助牙医回答如何最好地修复无剩余冠壁的根管治疗牙。
