A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Direct Short-Fiber Reinforced Composite Resin Restorations and Glass-Ceramic Endocrowns in Endodontically Treated Molars: A 4-Year Clinical Study
Tekijät: Bijelic-Donova Jasmina, Myyryläinen Tiina, Karsila Ville, Vallittu Pekka K, Tanner Johanna
Kustantaja: DENNIS BARBER LTD
Julkaisuvuosi: 2022
Journal: European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY
Lehden akronyymi: EUR J PROSTHODONT RE
Vuosikerta: 30
Numero: 4
Aloitussivu: 284
Lopetussivu: 295
Sivujen määrä: 12
ISSN: 0965-7452
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2333Bijelic-Donova12
Verkko-osoite: https://www.ejprd.org/download.php?op=institution_view_article&article_id=1080https://www.ejprd.org/unpublished_view.php?article_id=198
To compare the clinical performance of direct and indirect cusp covering restorations in endodontically treated molars (ETMs). Eighteen ETMs in sixteen patients were ran-domly assigned into one of the two study groups:Group 1 (SFCRs) direct composite res-torations with a short fiber-reinforced base, and Group 2 (GCEs) indirect glass-ceramic endocrowns. Eleven teeth were allocated to Group 1 and seven teeth to Group 2. Restora-tions were prepared in the student clinic between November 2012 and January 2015, and were evaluated at baseline and after 4.0 years according to modified USPHS criteria. The number of visits required for fabrication and maintenance of restorations were also compared. Two-way ANOVA was used to evaluate the differences between the groups (p=0.05). One SFCR and one GCE were lost due to secondary caries and endodontic complications, resulting in a 4-year survival rate of 90.9% and 85.7% respectively. Two SFCRs required minor grinding and polishing due to chipping or gloss loss, and two SF-CRs needed repair due to secondary caries or loss of proximal contact. One GCE required occlusal adjustment. GCEs showed smoother surface texture and better-preserved ana-tomic morphology. SFCRs required more maintenance, were simpler to produce, needed usually one visit and repairs were easier to perform.
