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.

Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth: Influence of the post systems and cements.

BACKGROUND: Endodontically treated teeth with extensive structural damage present higher fragility due to the low amount and worse quality of the reminiscent tissues of the crown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present in vitro study evaluated the effect of different intraradicular retainers and cementation agents on the fracture resistance of devitalized teeth. Incisive teeth (n = 40) of bovine mandibles were used. After preparation of the root canals, they were immersed in polyether, in a polyvinyl chloride cylinder containing acrylic resin, to simulate the periodontal ligament. The specimens were randomly divided into four groups (n = 10), according to the type of retainer (anatomical or main with accessory posts) and resin cement used (conventional resin cement - RelyX ARC or self-adhesive resin cement - RelyX U200). The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C and submitted to fracture resistance testing. ANOVA and Tukey's test were applied for data analysis, with significance level set at 5%. RESULTS: There was no interaction between cement type and intraradicular retainers (P = 0.56) or even between the types of cement used (P = 0.65). However, in the variation of the types of retainers, the group using main with accessory posts presented greater resistance to the fracture than the anatomical post (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Different cementing agents have no effect on the fracture strength of devitalized teeth, unlike the use of posts, in which the use of accessory post proved more resistant when compared to the anatomical post.