Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2025
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Single crown vs. composite for glass fiber post-retained restorations: An 8-year randomized clinical trial
Victório Poletto-Neto1, Luiz Alexandre Chisini1, Wietske Fokkinga2
1Graduate Program in Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, 96015560, RS, Brazil.
Objectives:
This study aimed to compare the success and survival rates of metal-ceramic crowns and composite resin restorations applied in root filled teeth that received a glass fiber post.
Methods:
A prospective, randomized controlled trial, with equivalent parallel groups was designed. Eighty-two teeth were randomly allocated to the metal-ceramic or composite resin groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis with shared frailty for patients and Kaplan-Meier curves were performed using success and survival rates (p<0.05).
Results:
Seventy-five post-retained restorations (34 metal-ceramic crowns and 41 composite restorations) in 62 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up was 8.1 years [IQR 4.0-9.9]. Twenty-seven failures were observed. Twenty-two failures (81.5 %) were observed in the composite resin group, of which six (27.3 %) were not repairable. Five failures (18.5 %) were observed in the metal-ceramic crown group, of which three (66.6 %) were non-repairable. The cumulative success rate at 8 years was 85.0 % for crowns (AFR=1.31 %) and 43.2 % for composite resins (AFR=6.58 %), while the survival rate was 93.8 % for crowns (AFR=0.52 %) and 97.6 % for composite resins (AFR=0.20 %). Considering the success rates, adjusted multivariate Cox regression showed that composite resin had a Hazard Ratio of 5.07 (95 %CI, 1.99-12.89) greater than the metal-ceramic crown. No significant difference in the failure risk was observed when the survival rates were considered (HR=0.38, 95 %CI (0.10 - 1.44), p = 0.156). Co-variables did not affect the success and survival rates (p>0.05).
Conclusions:
Metal-ceramic crowns showed a higher success rate than composite restorations. The survival rates were similar, but composite restorations presented a higher need for repairs.
Clinical Significance:
Post-retained composite restorations may need more reinterventions during the lifecycle, although more preservation of sound tooth structure is expected with a large restoration of resin post-and-core. These aspects have to be discussed with the patient for decision-making planning.
