SynthesisJournal of dentistry2021
Is a fiber post better than a metal post for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survival rate and treatment success of glass fiber posts cemented with two adhesive cementation strategies after up to 106 months: a randomized clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Trial
- Enhancement of Bond Strength, Degree of Conversion and Biocompatibility In Vitro Using a Hollow Glass Fiber Post With an Optical Illuminator in the Restoration of Endodontically Treated Teeth.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Article
- Compressive strength of endodontically treated mandibularpremolars rehabilitated with three techniques.Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Retention Force Between PEEK Posts with Different Surface Treatments and Resin Composites for Core Build-Up by a Pull-Out Test-Effect of Thermal Cycling.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Endocrowns for Rehabilitation of Anterior Teeth: In Vitro Mechanical Analysis.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Adverse outcomes of post-core restorations performed by undergraduate and postgraduate dental students: a retrospective comparison.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Comparison of the Bond Strength of Silane-Treated Glass Fiber Posts at Different Solvent Evaporation Times: An In Vitro Study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- In-vitro comparison of fracture resistance and failure patterns of endocrowns versus post-and-core restorations in maxillary central incisors with and without ferrule.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Apical Gap, Adaptation, and Trueness of Direct and Indirect Customized Post-and-Core Restorations Fabricated by the Casting, Milling, and Selective Laser Melting Techniques.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Biomimetic rehabilitation of a structurally compromised endodontically treated tooth using deep margin elevation and polyethylene fiber-reinforced post and core: a case report.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Role of root canal sealers and dentin surface pretreatment on pull-out strength of customized resilient ceramic posts-and-cores.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Enhanced and safe removal of a novel experimental fiber-colored post: an in vitro micro-CT study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of adaptation and fracture resistance of CAD-CAM fabricated zirconia posts in endodontically treated teeth.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Conservative Management of a Complicated Crown-Root Fracture Using Fiber Post Reattachment: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Mechanical Properties of PEEK Post-Cores Compared to Other Post-Cores: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.European journal of dentistry · 2025Article
- Biomechanical performance of post-and-cores of polyetheretherketone and its composites.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Stress Evaluation in Endodontically Treated Virtual Teeth Restored with Composite Fillings and Cast or Fiberglass Posts-A Finite Element Analysis.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Aging Effect on Push-Out Bond Strength of Six Resin Cements: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Complication Rates of Endodontically Treated Teeth with Fixed Dental Prostheses: A Retrospective Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate systematically the evidence about the failure rates of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) restored with intraradicular metal posts (MPs) or fiber posts (FPs). DATA: The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020189792). Eligibility criteria included randomized clinical trials (RCT) and prospective clinical trials (PCT) that compared the failures between FP and MP restorations for ETT. Meta-analyses were conducted for failure rates using fixed- and random-effects models. Subgroup and funnel plot analyses were performed. SOURCES: Four electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library), manual, and grey literature were screened by two researchers independently for articles published until November 2020 without language or time restrictions. For the analysis of the risk of bias, the Cochrane collaboration tool and ROBINS-I were used. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE. STUDY SELECTION: Ten studies were included. A total of 704 participants with a mean age of 42.7 years with a total of 844 ETT were restored using 453 FPs and 391 MPs. The FPs presented similar failures to that with MPs (P=0.39; risk ratio [RR]:0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52 to 1.29). Subgroup analysis showed no significant differences between the FPs and MPs for the anterior region (P=0.60; RR:0.88; [CI]: 0.54 to 1.42), posterior region (P=0.52; RR:1.18; [CI]: 0.71 to 1.98), root fracture (P=0.44; RR:0.78; [CI]: 0.41 to 1.49), and debonding (P=0.56; RR:1.27; [CI]: 0.57 to 2.80). Additionally, FP showed similar failures compared with those of cast (P=0.36; RR:0.63; [CI]: 0.23 to 1.72) and prefabricated MPs (P=0.68; RR:0.90; [CI]: 0.54 to 1.50). The RCT and PCT studies revealed a low risk of bias for most of the domains. However, the certainty of evidence was considered low.
conclusionNo evidence of difference was observed for failure rates between FPs, and MPs, independent of region and different MPs used in ETT. However, further well-conducted clinical studies with high-quality evidence are encouraged. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Our results indicate that both retainer posts can be considered an adequate alternative in restoring ETT. Therefore, the choice of post (fiber or metal) could be based on dentist preference or individual characteristics of the patient as the failure rates for different posts are similar.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34274439What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.