Restoration of Root Filled Teeth; Current Opinions and Techniques
Fouad Kadim Wahab1, Sari Adel Mahasneh1, Faleh Abdelhafeeth Sawair2, Mahmoud Anwar Hamdan3, Susan Nweiser Hattar1, Mohammad Abdalla AL-Rabab’ah1, *
Identifiers and Pagination:Year: 2021
First Page: 71
Last Page: 83
Publisher Id: TODENTJ-15-71
Article History:Received Date: 24/10/2020
Revision Received Date: 15/1/2021
Acceptance Date: 26/1/2021
Electronic publication date: 22/03/2021
Collection year: 2021
open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
To examine current decision-making preferences of Jordanian dentists when Restoring Root Filled Teeth (RFT).
Materials and Methods:
834 Jordanian general dentists, prosthodontists and endodontists were invited to participate in a validated online survey with a 62% participation rate. Respondents were invited to answer 24 questions about their preferences for techniques and materials they use to restore RFT. The questions aimed at exploring restorative strategies commonly employed by Jordanian dentists when managing root filled teeth with extensive loss of tooth structure.
A minority of dentists consider direct resin restoration as the sole restoration for RFT with extensive loss of tooth structure. Full coverage metal-ceramic and all-ceramic crowns are more popular than endocrowns when restoring RFT with indirect restoration. Fiber posts are the most popular type of posts, followed by prefabricated metal posts. Glass ionomer is the most preferred cement for luting metal posts, while conventional dual resin cement with separate etch and rinse bonding strategy is the most employed when bonding fiber posts. The majority of dentists tend not to pretreat fiber posts. Loss of post/core retention or fracture of coronal tooth structure are the two most common reasons observed by dentists when RFT fail.
Use of post and core is still preferred over more conservative approaches when restoring RFT with extensive loss of coronal tooth structure. Longevity of restorations can be enhanced by training practicing dentists on evidence-based adhesive strategies.