Guzmán Reyes S K, Brito Bojorque D E, Calle Prado J F, Romero Mogrovejo T E, Ruales-Carrera E, Delgado Gaete B A, Pauletto P
Universidad Católica de Cuenca (UCACUE), Américas Avenue and Humboldt Cuenca, Ecuador.
School of Dentistry, Universidad de Las Américas (UDLA), Cristóbal Colón Avenue, E9-2411 Quito, Ecuador.
Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2025 Feb 28;33(1):65-82. doi: 10.1922/EJPRD_2802GuzmanReyes18.
To perform a systematic review of in vitro studies examining endodontically treated anterior teeth restored with fiberglass posts versus composite posts reinforced with: polyethylene fibers (Ribbond), fiber-reinforced resin (everStick) and composite resin (everX).
The search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS. The studies were selected by two independent reviewers. To assess the risk of bias of each study, the QUIN tool was used. We analyzed the data using a narrative synthesis.
Five articles were retained for final analysis. The risk of bias was moderate to high. Most studies reported non-catastrophic failures. With 72 non-catastrophic failures for the glass fiber group and 60 for the fiber-reinforced resins. Catastrophic failures were more prevalent in fiber-reinforced composite, especially in the Ribbond-treated group.
Within the limitations of this study, the use of fiberreinforced composites as custom intracanal posts is still questionable, with controversial results. It is not possible to establish the superiority of one approach over the other in endodontically treated anterior teeth without ferrule.
It was not possible to identify a superior performance among the approaches analyzed for the restoration of endodontically treated anterior teeth without ferrule.
对体外研究进行系统评价，这些研究比较了用玻璃纤维桩修复的根管治疗前牙与用以下材料增强的复合树脂桩：聚乙烯纤维（Ribbond）、纤维增强树脂（everStick）和复合树脂（everX）。
通过PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和LILACS进行检索。由两名独立的评审员选择研究。为评估每项研究的偏倚风险，使用了QUIN工具。我们采用叙述性综合分析数据。
五篇文章被保留用于最终分析。偏倚风险为中度至高。大多数研究报告了非灾难性失败。玻璃纤维组有72例非灾难性失败，纤维增强树脂组有60例。灾难性失败在纤维增强复合材料中更为普遍，尤其是在Ribbond治疗组。
在本研究的局限性内，使用纤维增强复合材料作为定制根管内桩仍存在疑问，结果存在争议。在没有箍的根管治疗前牙中，无法确定一种方法优于另一种方法。
在分析的用于修复没有箍的根管治疗前牙的方法中，无法确定哪种方法具有更优的性能。
