ArticleCureus2026
Reinforce, Don't Sacrifice: A Dentin-Preserving Alternative to Post-and-Core Restorations Using Ribbond, everStickPOST, and Interlig Fibers.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Restoration of structurally compromised endodontically treated anterior teeth remains challenging because additional radicular dentin removal during post-space preparation may further compromise the remaining tooth structure. Fiber-reinforced systems provide a conservative approach by permitting intracanal reinforcement while minimizing additional removal of radicular dentin. This three-case clinical report describes the rehabilitation of three structurally compromised, endodontically treated maxillary central incisors using three different fiber-reinforced systems: everStickPOST, Ribbond, and Interlig. In all three cases, treatment emphasized preservation of the remaining radicular and pericervical dentin. In the everStickPOST case, 5 mm of apical gutta-percha was preserved, whereas approximately 4 mm of coronal gutta-percha was removed in the Ribbond and the Interlig cases to preserve pericervical dentin. The fibers were individually adapted to the prepared canal anatomy and incorporated into adhesive composite core restorations. In the Interlig case, bioactive glass treatment followed by riboflavin and 0.2% chitosan pretreatment was additionally performed before fiber placement. A full-coverage crown was provided in the everStickPOST and Ribbond cases because of the extent of coronal structural loss, whereas the Interlig case was restored with direct composite restorations because sufficient coronal and pericervical tooth structure remained. All three cases demonstrated satisfactory clinical and radiographic outcomes at the reported clinical evaluation. These cases illustrate the potential application of customized fiber-reinforced intracanal reinforcement as a conservative strategy for restoring structurally compromised endodontically treated anterior teeth. The treatment approach emphasizes preservation of radicular dentin, individualized adaptation to canal anatomy, and selection of the definitive coronal restoration according to the residual tooth structure and biomechanical requirements.
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.