Prefabricated Endodontic Posts: Glass Fiber Versus Titanium - A Randomized Controlled Pilot- Trial

Phase 4

Completed

• Conditions: Endodontically Treated Teeth; Tooth Fractures
• Interventions: Device: prefabricated glass fiber reinforced composite post; Device: prefabricated titanium post

• Registration Number: NCT01520766
• Lead Sponsor: Charite University, Berlin, Germany

Brief Summary

A randomized parallel-group clinical pilot study was designed to evaluate the impact of glass fiber reinforced composite posts compared to prefabricated titanium posts on long term survival of adhesively restored endodontically treated abutment teeth.

Detailed Description

Compared to vital teeth the complication rate of restorations fixed on endodontically treated abutment teeth is higher. Endodontically treated teeth are more prone to fracture due to the higher amount of calcified tooth structure loss. To level the biological short coming the choice of the mechanically appropriate post material is still a major concern. There a two major approaches. One is to use a rigid material to stiffen the post-endodontic complex and the other is to use a material which shows dentin-like material properties to allow the post-endodontic complex to flex under load. It was aim of the presented randomised controlled trial to compare the survival rates of abutment teeth self-adhesively restored with either prefabricated glass-fiber reinforced composite posts or titanium posts.

The null-hypothesis was that there is no difference regarding survival rate between glass-fiber and titanium post restored endodontically treated abutment teeth with two or less remaining cavity walls.

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2003-01
• Primary Completion: 2004-04
• Study Completion: 2011-08
• Status Verified: 2012-01
• Study First Submitted: 2012-01-24
• Study First Submitted QC: 2012-01-26
• Study First Posted: 2012-01-30
• Last Update Submitted: 2012-01-30
• Last Update Posted: 2012-01-31

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 91

Inclusion Criteria

• two or less cavity walls of the crown remaining,
• residual root canal thickness at the orifice of more than 1 mm,
• symptom free tooth with a root canal filling without radiologically visible periapical lesion,
• minimum of radiologic root-to-alveolar bone ratio of 2 after prospective crown lengthening,
• no or treated periodontitis with maximum probing depth of 4 mm and no bleeding on probing,
• tooth mobility not more than score II,
• willingness to return for follow-up examination for at least 5 years

Exclusion Criteria

• tooth was aimed to serve as telescopic crown abutment

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
glass fiber	prefabricated glass fiber reinforced composite post	-
titanium	prefabricated titanium post	-

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
loss of restoration for any reason	84 months after post placement	The patients were recalled at 3, 6, 12 month and thereafter in al yearly recall up to 84 month after post placement for clinical examination. The clinical examination was performed by one blinded dentist.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
tooth loss, post debonding, post fracture, vertical or horizontal root fracture, endodontic or periradicular conditions requiring endodontic re-treatment, secondary caries and failure of core build-up and loss of restoration due to technical failures	84 month after post placement	The clinical examination was performed by one blinded dentist. Follow-up examinations were performed with a dental probe to detect marginal gap formation of restorations. After 12 and 60 months radiographs were taken and examined by one operator (MN) to exclude the possibility of radiographic symptoms of failure, e.g. periodontal or periapical lesions.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, CC3, Department of Prosthodontics, Geriatric Dentistry and Craniomandibular Disorders, Germany; 🇩🇪 Berlin, Germany