Risk factors of post restorations: A prospective observational practice-based clinical study

Conditions

K02

Wierichs RJ, Maklennan A, Kramer EJ, Jungbluth H, Naumann M, Meyer-Lueckel H.

2025-11-16

10.1016/j.jdent.2025.106238

Long-Term Evaluation of Post Restorations: Results from a Practice-Based Study with up to 20 Years of Follow-Up.

Wierichs, R. J., Maklennan, A., Kramer, E J, Jungbluth, H, Naumann, M et al. (6 authors)

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern2025-11-16

10.48620/92526

Long-term costs of post-restorations: 7-year practice-based results from Germany

Falk Schwendicke, Enno J. Kramer, Joachim Krois, H. Meyer‐Lueckel, Richard Johannes Wierichs

Clinical Oral Investigations2020-08-286 citations

10.1007/s00784-020-03529-5

Interventions

Group 1: Eight general dental practitioners will each place up to 30 posts in endodontically treated teeth. Selected clinical information at placement and all recall visits will be recorded. For this,

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients with a need of restoration of at least one endodontically treated tooth will be invited and screened between June 2003 and November 2006. Inclusion criteria will be as followed: 1. need of root canal treatment and post-supported restoration 2. symptom-free tooth with adequate root canal filling 3. incisisor, canines and premolars 4. one tooth per patient. In cases were more than one post restoration will be registered the first one will be included in the study 5. maximum of 30 patients per dentist

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria:

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
The observation period starts with the date when the post is inserted. Whenever the post will be ‘recemented’, renewed, or the tooth will be extracted the intervention will be considered as failed. When the post will still be in function at the last check-up visit and will found to be clinically acceptable, the intervention will be considered successful. During the regular check-ups, the posts are monitored. No restriction in respect to the last check-up is given.	—

Measure

Time frame

The observation period starts with the date when the post is inserted. Whenever the post will be ‘recemented’, renewed, or the tooth will be extracted the intervention will be considered as failed. When the post will still be in function at the last check-up visit and will found to be clinically acceptable, the intervention will be considered successful. During the regular check-ups, the posts are monitored. No restriction in respect to the last check-up is given.

—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
The observation period starts with the date when the post is inserted. Whenever the post will be renewed, or the tooth will be extracted the intervention will be considered as failed. If a post can be recemented after loss of retention without renewal of the restoration the observation period will not be considered as censored or failed. When the post is still in function at the last check-up visit and is found to be clinically acceptable, the intervention will be considered as a ‘survival’.	—

Measure

Time frame

The observation period starts with the date when the post is inserted. Whenever the post will be renewed, or the tooth will be extracted the intervention will be considered as failed. If a post can be recemented after loss of retention without renewal of the restoration the observation period will not be considered as censored or failed. When the post is still in function at the last check-up visit and is found to be clinically acceptable, the intervention will be considered as a ‘survival’.

—

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactRichard Wierichs

Klinik für Zahnerhaltung, Parodontologie und Präventive Zahnheilkunde,Universitätsklinikum der RWTH Aachen

rwierichs@ukaachen.de0241 80-88110

Outcome results

None listed