ArticleBMC oral health2025
Biomechanical performance of post-and-cores of polyetheretherketone and its composites.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Fracture load analysis of telescopic overdentures fabricated from PEEK and zirconia.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- AI-powered finite element analysis for predicting fracture patterns in endodontically treated teeth restored with posts.Bioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPolyetheretherketone (PEEK) and its fiber-reinforced composites have been indicated as ideal post-and-cores materials due to its mechanical properties. However, the laboratory evidences of post-and-cores restored with fiber-reinforced PEEK are lacking. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 120 extracted mandibular premolars were treated endodontically and divided into six groups restored with different post-and-core materials (N = 20): (1) prefabricated quartz fiber-reinforced composite (QFRC), (2) polymer-infiltrated ceramic (PIC), (3) cobalt chromium (CoCr), (4) PEEK, (5) 30% glass fiber-reinforced PEEK (GFR-PEEK), and (6) 30% carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK (CFR-PEEK). Stress distribution was analyzed by finite element analysis (FEA). Then, each group was then divided into two subgroups (n = 10): static loading test and fatigue loading test. The static failure load (SFL) was analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with least-significant difference (LSD) multiple comparison tests. The fatigue failure load (FFL) and cycles for failure (CFF) were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (P < 0.05).
resultsGroups PEEK, GFR-PEEK, and CFR-PEEK exhibited lower maximum peak principal stress and better stress distribution than Group CoCr. The SFL of Groups PEEK and QFRC did not differ from each other, and both were lower than those of Groups CoCr, GFR-PEEK, and CFR-PEEK. In the fatigue loading test, Group CoCr exhibited the best survival; however, with the progression of fatigue, the survival probabilities of Groups PEEK and its composites were close to that of Group CoCr. In all groups apart from Group CoCr, the rate of repairable failure modes was higher than that of irreparable ones.
conclusionsCustomized post-and-cores manufactured with PEEK and its fiber-reinforced composites showed superior biomechanical performance, making them potential alternatives for the restoration of massive tooth defects. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides a theoretical basis for clinicians to select post-and-core materials for different root canal morphology residual roots and helps to reduce the occurrence of complications such as root fracture and post core debonding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.