Purpose: This controlled clinical trial aimed to compare the 3-year outcomes of glass fiber posts and composite cores with gold alloy-based posts and cores for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth. Materials and Methods: One hundred forty-four patients in need of 205 restorations on endodontically treated teeth were selected and followed for 7 to 37 months (mean: 21 ± 9 months). The teeth were primarily stratified based on the remaining tissue available to restore the tooth core with or without a post. Then, randomization allocated the teeth to either test group 1 (prefabricated glass fiber posts), test group 2 (custom-made glass fiber posts), or test group 3 (composite cores without posts). The control group consisted of gold alloy-based posts and cores. All posts/cores were covered with all-ceramic single crowns. Failures were either absolute, such as root fractures or irreparable fractures of the post/core, or relative, such as loss of post retention or reparable fractures of the core. Success and survival probability lifetime curves, corrected for clustering, were drawn for the entire data set. Results: The recall rate at 3 years was 97.1%. Absolute failures consisted of two root fractures and one endodontic failure, while relative failures included three instances of retention loss of the post/core and one post fracture. Because of the low number of events, no statistical tests were performed. The success and survival probabilities over all groups together at 3 years amounted to 91.7% and 97.2%, respectively. Conclusions: After being followed for up to 3 years, both cast gold and composite post and core systems performed well clinically. Longer follow-up times are needed to detect possible significant differences. Int J Prosthodont 2011;24:363-372.
Related JoVE Video
Journal of Visualized Experiments
What is Visualize?
JoVE Visualize is a tool created to match the last 5 years of PubMed publications to methods in JoVE's video library.
How does it work?
We use abstracts found on PubMed and match them to JoVE videos to create a list of 10 to 30 related methods videos.
Video X seems to be unrelated to Abstract Y...
In developing our video relationships, we compare around 5 million PubMed articles to our library of over 4,500 methods videos. In some cases the language used in the PubMed abstracts makes matching that content to a JoVE video difficult. In other cases, there happens not to be any content in our video library that is relevant to the topic of a given abstract. In these cases, our algorithms are trying their best to display videos with relevant content, which can sometimes result in matched videos with only a slight relation.