Núcleos metálicos fundidos vs pinos de fibra de vidro: 9 anos de um ensaio controlado randomizado

Abstract

Although the selection of the intraradicular post is an important step in the rehabilitation of endodontically treated teeth, especially when there is a great loss of dental structure, long-term answers about decision-making regarding the choice of the post and predictability of each option are also sought. Thus, the objective of this study will be to evaluate the survival and success of cast metal cores and glass fiber posts used to restore endodontically treated teeth without coronary walls after 9 years of clinical follow-up. Patients rehabilitated with intraradicular posts and coronary restoration attended at the Faculty of Dentistry of the Federal University of Pelotas (UFPel) in a randomized controlled clinical trials will be reassessed annually until the 9th year of follow up. The study will take into account the evaluation of survival and clinical success of randomized and restored teeth with cast metal core (control) and glass fiber post (experimental) and will be done by calibrated examiners who will perform the clinical and radiographic evaluation. The baseline will be considered to be the cementation date, radiographic changes (periapical lesions or secondary caries), crown or post decementation will be recorded; fracture of the restoration, core, post and / or root. The variables gender, arch location, follow-up time, post type, ferrule size, caries risk was assessed. Survival/success analysis was performed by the Kaplan Meier method, followed by log rank test. The p value considered was 5%. One hundred and one patients and 150 teeth were reassessed. No statistically significant differences were observed when comparing the survival and success between two types of posts. Considering the success of restorations, statistically significant differences were observed in relation to the position of the teeth in the arch, posterior teeth failed more than anterior for both posts (P=0.0252) (n=17); however, when stratifying the analysis, the same difference (P = 0.0067) was observed only in glass fiber group. In relation to restoration survival, there was no statistically significant difference for any comparisons (n=12). In conclusion, both restorative strategies can be used to rehabilitate endodontically treated teeth without walls, with no differences for survival or success of restorations. However, it is important to note that glass fiber posts failed more in posterior teeth when considered the success of the restorations.