Influence of coronal restorations on the periapical health of endodontically treated teeth.

By Tronstad L, Asbjørnsen K, Døving L, Pedersen I, Eriksen HM.

Date: 03/2000
Journal: Endod Dent Traumatol. 

Summary:  

Purpose:

To evaluate a possible relationship between the quality of the coronal restoration, the root canal obturation, and the periapical status of endodontically treated teeth duplicating the methodology of a previous study by (Ray &Trope, 1995).

Materials and Methods:

 – n: 1001 treated teeth. Teeth were then categorized to 4 groups: GE (Good Endodontics), PE (Poor Endodontics), GR (Good Restoration), and BR (Bad Restoration) by evaluating 2D rgs with 2x magnification by 3 examiners.

Good endodontics: All canals obturated. No voids present. Root filling ending between 2 mm short of and 1 mm beyond radiographic apex.

Poor endodontics: Root filling ending more than 2mm from radiographic apex. Root filling with voids or canals not filled. Root filling poorly dimensioned or poorly condensed.

Good restoration: Any permanent restoration that appeared intact radiographically.

Poor restoration: Any permanent restoration with radiographic signs of overhangs, recurrent decay or open margins.

Success: Normal width of PDL space. Normal appearance of surrounding bone. Failure: PARL.

Most Highlighted Results:

-Teeth with post had a success rate of 71%; teeth without post had a success rate of 64% ; the diff wasn’t sig. -SR of GE+GR was 81% and GE+PR had a SR of 71%. The diff was sig. -SR of PE+GR was 56% and PE+PR had a SR of 57% as shown in Table.1. -There was a sig diff between GE and PE regardless of the restoration type.

Clinical Significance:

– The quality of the coronal restoration had no bearing on the outcome of the endodontic treatment.