Randomized Clinical Comparison of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Fiber Posts or Cast Metal Posts
Sponsor study identifier
interventional
200
1 country
1
Study Start
July 2009
Date type not reportedThis date has not been verified as actual or estimated.
Primary Completion
December 2017
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Study Completion
July 2018
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
There are few randomized controlled trials comparing intraradicular posts used to restore endodontically treated teeth, especially considering cast posts and glass fiber posts. The investigators study will evaluate the clinical success rates of endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber posts or cast posts and metal ceramic crown. Individuals included in this study should present any tooth with endodontic treatment and need of intraradicular retention (post) on maxilla or mandible according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Individuals will be randomly allocated into two groups: (1) endodontically treated teeth restored with fiber post and composite resin core and metal ceramic crown or (2) endodontically treated teeth restored with cast post and core and metal ceramic crown. A sample size calculation will be performed to establish the number of posts needed for comparison. All crowns and posts will be cemented with self-adhesive cement. Individuals will be examined by calibrated examiners, in years 1 to 3. The reason of failure will be categorized as root fracture, fracture of the post, post debonding, clinical and/or radiographical evidence of a gap between restoration and tooth or endodontic failure, tooth extraction, secondary caries, or marginal defects. The confidence level will be set in 95%.
Registry-reported information. Elapsed time and enrollment totals alone do not measure study progress or recruitment pace.
July 2018
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Some registry-reported names shown below are not yet linked in this graph.
Dates and qualifiers reported by the registry. Estimated dates do not confirm that a milestone has occurred.
July 2009
Date type not reportedThis date has not been verified as actual or estimated.
July 5, 2011
Actual (reported)October 28, 2011
Actual (reported)December 2017
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
July 2018
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Post and core survival
72 months
patient satisfaction with the treatment
18 months
quality of crowns and restorations (FDI criteria)
18 months
endodontic success
18 months
pre-fabricated glass fiber posts, cemented with self-adhesive resinous cement
Ni-Cr alloy cast post and core luted with self-adhesive resin cement
School of Dentistry - Federal University of Pelotas
Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul, 96015560, Brazil
Bergoli CD, Machry RV, Schwantz JK, Brondani LP, Pereira-Cenci T, Pereira GKR, Valandro LF. Survival rate and treatment success of glass fiber posts cemented with two adhesive cementation strategies after up to 106 months: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2023 May;27(5):2197-2206. doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-04939-x. Epub 2023 Mar 9.
Sarkis-Onofre R, Amaral Pinheiro H, Poletto-Neto V, Bergoli CD, Cenci MS, Pereira-Cenci T. Randomized controlled trial comparing glass fiber posts and cast metal posts. J Dent. 2020 May;96:103334. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103334. Epub 2020 Apr 14.
Tatiana Pereira-Cenci, PhD
Federal University of Pelotas
Rogério Castilho Jacinto, PhD
Federal University of Pelotas
First Submitted
July 5, 2011
First Posted
October 28, 2011
Study Start
July 2009
Date type not reportedThis date has not been verified as actual or estimated.
Primary Completion
fiber post luted with conventional etch-and-rinse adhesive system and conventional resin cement, followed by core construction with composite resin
Registry-reported names are shown in full. Names without a link have not yet been matched to a Syfrah profile.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Skupien JA, Cenci MS, Opdam NJ, Kreulen CM, Huysmans MC, Pereira-Cenci T. Crown vs. composite for post-retained restorations: A randomized clinical trial. J Dent. 2016 May;48:34-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.03.007. Epub 2016 Mar 11.
December 2017
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Study Completion
July 2018
Estimated (date passed)This estimate has passed. The registry has not confirmed an actual date for this milestone.
Last Updated
April 6, 2017
Record last verified: 2017-04
Download the complete ClinicalTrials.gov record imported by Syfrah, including fields not shown in this page. The registry may contain a newer revision.
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov.
JSON downloads include source attribution and retrieval details alongside the unchanged original record or the separately normalized values.
Source retrieved: