Frankenberger Roland, Becker Stephan, Beck-Broichsitter Benedicta, Albrecht-Hass Susanne, Behrens Charlotte J, Roggendorf Matthias J, Koch Andreas
Department of Operative Dentistry, Endodontics, and Pediatric Dentistry, Medical Center for Dentistry, University Medical Center Giessen and Marburg, 35392 Marburg, Germany.
Prof. Becker & Kollegen, Kehdenstrasse 2-10, 47803 Kiel, Germany.
Dent J (Basel). 2024 Apr 1;12(4):90. doi: 10.3390/dj12040090.
(1) Background: Non-surgical endodontic treatment has been shown to be clinically successful; however, clinical long-term data are scarce. This practice-based retrospective clinical investigation evaluated endodontic outcomes over 40 years and identified relevant clinical co-factors. (2) Methods: Two experienced dental practitioners in two different private dental practices treated 174 patients with 245 teeth from 1969 to 1993. After root canal obturation, either a new direct restoration (amalgam, resin composite, or glass-ionomer cement) or the re-cementation of a pre-existing prosthetic restoration or renewal of prosthetic restoration followed. Metal posts (operator A) or metal screws (operator B) were inserted when coronal substance loss was significant. The primary outcome (i.e., tooth survival) was achieved when the endodontically treated tooth was, in situ, painless and had full function at the end of the observation period. A secondary outcome, the impact of different prognostic factors on survival rate, was evaluated. (3) Results: The overall mean survival was 56.1% of all treated teeth after 40 years of clinical service, resulting in an annual failure rate of 1.1%. Most investigated clinical co-factors (jaw, tooth position, intracanal dressings, post/screw placement, and gender) showed no significant influence on survival. (4) Conclusions: Even with materials and techniques from the 1970s and 1980s, successful root canal treatment was achievable. Except for post-endodontic restorations, most of the evaluated factors had no significant influence on the clinical long-term survival of root canal-treated teeth.
(1) 背景:非手术牙髓治疗已被证明在临床上是成功的;然而,临床长期数据却很匮乏。这项基于实践的回顾性临床研究评估了40年间的牙髓治疗结果,并确定了相关的临床共同因素。(2) 方法:1969年至1993年,两名经验丰富的牙科医生在两家不同的私人牙科诊所治疗了174例患者的245颗牙齿。根管充填后,要么进行新的直接修复(银汞合金、树脂复合材料或玻璃离子水门汀),要么重新粘结现有的修复体或更换修复体。当冠部牙体组织大量缺损时,操作者A插入金属桩,操作者B插入金属螺钉。当接受牙髓治疗的牙齿在观察期结束时原位无痛且功能正常时,达到主要结局(即牙齿存活)。评估了次要结局,即不同预后因素对存活率的影响。(3) 结果:经过40年的临床使用,所有治疗牙齿的总体平均存活率为56.1%,年失败率为1.1%。大多数研究的临床共同因素(颌骨、牙齿位置、根管内敷料、桩/螺钉放置和性别)对存活率没有显著影响。(4) 结论:即使采用20世纪70年代和80年代的材料和技术,也能实现成功的根管治疗。除牙髓治疗后的修复外,大多数评估因素对根管治疗牙齿的临床长期存活没有显著影响。