Ghyeath Munadhil AZEEZ, IŞIL ÇEKİÇ NAGAŞ

Aşırı harabiyet gösteren endodontik tedavili dişlerin protetik restorasyonları

Endodontik tedavi; çürük, kırık veya periodontal hastalıktan belirgin olarak etkilenen dişlerde, kök çevresi sağlığının sürdürülmesi için kök kanalından canlı bakteri ve toksinlerin uzaklaştırılması amacıyla uygulanmaktadır. Endodontik tedavili dişin uzun dönem başarısı sadece kök kanal tedavisine değil, aynı zamanda post-endodontik restorasyonun kalitesine bağlıdır. Geçmişte, yapısal olarak zayıflamış endodontik tedavili dişin post-endodontik restorasyonu çok sert materyallerle gerçekleştirilmekteydi. Son günlerde, dentini yakın bir şekilde taklit eden materyaller tercih edilmektedir. Bu dişlerin restorasyonu, restoratif materyalin tutuculuk ve direnci, kalan diş dokusunun okluzal kuvvetlere direnci, uygun koronal ve kök içi tıkama ve aynı zamanda estetik gibi gereksinimleri sağlayabilmelidir. Bu derlemede, aşırı harabiyete uğrayan endoodontik tedavili dişlerin protetik restorasyonları ve bu alandaki güncel gelişmeler irdelenmiştir.

Posthetic restorations of severely damaged endodontically-treated teeth

Endodontic therapy is performed on teeth significantly affected by caries, fracture or periodontal disease, for eliminating viable bacteria and toxins from the root canal to sustain periradicular health. The long-term success of endodontically treated teeth depends not only on root canal therapy itself as well as the quality of the post-endodontic restoration. In the past, the post-endodontic restoration of endodontically treated teeth that is structurally weakened was performed with very rigid materials. Nowadays, the materials that simulate dentin closely are mostly preferred. Restoration of these teeth needs to fulfill the necessities such as retention and resistance of the restorative material, the resistance of the remaining dental tissue to occlusal forces, proper coronal and intraradicular obturation and also aesthetic. In this review, prosthetic restorations of severely damaged endodontically-treated teeth and the current innovations in this field have been clarified.

PDF

___

1. Huang TJ, Schilder H, Nathanson D. Effects of moisture content and endodontic treatment on some mechanical properties of human dentin. J Endod 1992; 18: 209-215.
2. Hargreaves, Kenneth M., Louis H. Berman. Cohen's pathways of the pulp expert consult. 11th edn. Philadelphia: Elsevier Mosby; 2015.
3. Helfer AR, Melnick S, Schilder H. Determination of the moisture content of vital ve pulpless teeth. Oral Surg Med Pathol 1972; 34; 661-670.
4. Lang H, Korkmaz Y, Schneider K, Raab W. Impact of endodontic treatments on the rigidity of the root. J Dent Res 2006: 85; 364-368.
5. Trope M, Herbert LR. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated roots. Oral Surg Med Pathol 1992: 73; 99-102.
6. Panitvisai P, Messer HH. Cuspal deflection in molars in relation to endodontic and restorative procedures. J Endod 1995; 21: 57-61.
7. Paphangkorakit J, Osborn JW. The effect of normal occlusal forces on fluid movement through human dentine in vitro. Arc Oral Biol 2000; 45: 1033-1041.
8. Hasanoğlu AD. Cam seramik endokronların biyomekaniksel özelliklerinin preklinik ve klinik olarak değerlendi rilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Doktora tezi, Ankara, 2012.
9. Hülsmann M, Heckendorff M, Lennon A. Chelating agents in root canal treatment: mode of action and indications for their use. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 810-830.
10. Hawkins CL, Davies MJ. Hypochlorite-induced damage to proteins: formation of nitrogen-centred radicals from lysine residues and their role in protein fragmentation. Biochem J 1998; 332: 617-625.
11. Carrilho MR, Carvalho RM, De Goes MF, Di Hipolito V, Geraldeli S, Tay FR, Pashley DH, Tjäderhane L. Chlorhexidine preserves dentin bond in vitro. J Dent Res 2007; 86: 90-94.
12. Kinney JH, Marshall SJ, Marshall GW. The mechanical properties of human dentin: a critical review and re-evaluation of the dental literature. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2003; 14: 13-29.
13. Keyf F. Aşırı madde kaybına uğramış dişlerin protetik onarımı: Post-Core sistemlerinin retantif özellikleri. Acta Odont Turc 1992; 9: 209.
14. Mentink AG, Meeuwissen R, Käyser AF, Mulder J. Survival rate and failure characteristics of the all metal post and core restoration. J Oral Rehabil 1993; 20: 455-461.
15. Torbjörner A, Karlsson S, Odman PA. Survival rate and failure characteristics for two post designs. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 73: 439-444.
16. Nanayakkara L, McDonald AV, Setchell DJ. Retrospective analysis of factors affecting the longevity of post crowns. J Dent Res 1999; 78: 222.
17. Guldener KA, Lanzrein CL, Siegrist Guldener BE, Lang NP, Ramseier CA, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of endodontically treated teeth restored with or without fiber post-retained single-unit restorations. J Endod 2017; 43: 188-193.
18. Zicari F, Van Meerbeek B, Debels E, Lesaffre E, Naert I. An up to 3-Year controlled clinical trial comparing the outcome of glass fiber posts and composite cores with gold alloy-based posts and cores for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth. Int J Prosthodont 2011; 24: 363-372.
19. Murali Mohan S, Mahesh Gowda E, Shashidhar MP. Clinical evaluation of the fiber post and direct composite resin restoration for fixed single crowns on endodontically treated teeth. Med J Armed Forces India 2015; 71: 259-264.
20. Sorensen JA, Engelman MJ. Ferrule design and fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 63: 529-536.
21. Zhi-Yue L, Yu-Xing Z. Effects of post-core design and ferrule on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary central incisors. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 89: 368-373.
22. al-Hazaimeh N1, Gutteridge DL. An in vitro study into the effect of the ferrule preparation on the fracture resistance of crowned teeth incorporating prefabricated post and composite core restorations. Int Endod J 2001; 34: 40-46.
23. Coşkun A, Yaluğ S. Metal desteksiz porselen sistemleri. Cumhur Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2002; 5: 98-102.
24. Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD. Fundamentals of Fixed Prosthodontics. 4th edn. Quintessence Pub Co: Chicago; 2012.
25. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics, 5th edn. Mosby: St. Louis; 2016.
26. Cekic-Nagas I, Uzun G. Position of fiber-reinforced composites in prosthetic applications. Hacettepe Diş Hek Fak Derg 2009; 33: 49-60.
27. Fredriksson M, Astbäck J, Pamenius M, Arvidson K. A retrospective study of 236 patients with teeth restored by carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts. J Prosthet Dent1998; 80: 151-157.
28. Eskitaşcıoğlu G, Belli S, Kalkan M. Evaluation of two post core systems using two different methods (fracture strength test and a finite elemental stress analysis). J Endod 2002; 28: 629-633.
29. Piconi C, Maccauro G. Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial. Biomaterials 1999; 20: 1-25.
30. Gbadebo SO, Ajayi DM, Abiodun-Solanke IM, Sulaiman AO. Survival of glass fiber post retained endodontically treated teeth preliminary report. Afr J Med Med Sci 2013; 42: 265-269.
31. Koutayas SO, Kern M. All-ceramic posts and cores: the state of the art. Quintessence Int 1999; 30: 383-392.
32. Kelly JR. Dental ceramics: current thinking and trends. Dent Clin North Am 2004; 48: 513-530.
33. Goracci C, Ferrari M. Current perspectives on post systems: a literature review. Aust Dent J 2011; 56: 77-83.
34. Ozkurt Z, Işeri U, Kazazoğlu E. Zirconia ceramic post systems: a literature review and a case report. Dent Mater J 2010; 29: 233-245.
35. Heydecke G, Butz F, Hussein A, Strub JR. Fracture strength after dynamic loading of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post-and-core systems. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87: 438-445.
36. Egilmez F, Ergun G, Cekic-Nagas I, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Influence of cement thickness on the bond strength of tooth-colored posts to root dentin after thermal cycling. Acta Odontol Scand 2013; 71: 175-182.
37. Ergun G, Kaya BM, Egilmez F, Nagas IC. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated roots restored with zirconia post and different core materials. Cumhur Dent J 2014; 17: 27-31.
38. Cheung W. A review of the management of endodontically treated teeth. Post, core and the fina lrestoration. J Am Dent Assoc 2005; 136: 611-619.
39. Stober T, Rammelsberg P. The failure rate of adhesi vely retained composite core build-ups in comparison with metal-added glass ionomer core build-ups. J Dent 2005; 33: 27-32.
40. Pilo R, Cardash HS, Levin E, Assif D. Effect of core stiffness on the in vitro fracture of crowned, endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 302-306.
41. Kovarik RE, Breeding LC, Caughman WF. Fatigue life of three core materials under simulated chewing conditions. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 68: 584-590.
42. Cekic-Nagas I, Ergun G, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Influence of polymerization mode on degree of conversion and micropush-out bond strength of resin core systems using different adhesive systems. Dent Mater J 2008; 27: 376- 385.
43. Reagan SE, Fruits TJ, Van Brunt CL, Ward CK. Effects of cyclic loading on selected post-and-core systems. Quintessence Int 1999; 30: 61-67.
44. Gateau P, Sabek M, Dailey B. Fatique testing and microscopic evaluation of post and core restorations under artificial crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 82: 341-347.
45. Cekic-Nagas I, Sukuroglu E, Canay S. Does the surface treatment affect the bond strength of various fibre-post systems to resin-core materials? J Dent 2011; 39:171-179.
46. Dayangaç B. Kompozit rezin restorasyonlar. Güneş Kitabevi, 2000.
47. Möllersten L, Lockowandt P, Lindén LA. A comparison of strengths of five core and post-and-core systems. Quintessence Int 2002; 33: 140-149.
48. Martínez-González A1, Amigó-Borrás V, Fons-Font A, Selva-Otaolaurruchi E, Labaig-Rueda C. Response of three types of cast posts and cores to static loading. Quintessen Int 2001; 32: 552-560.
49. Toksavul S, Toman M, Uyulgan B, Schmage P, Nergiz I. Effect of luting agents and reconstruction techniques on the fracture resistance of pre‐fabricated post systems. J Oral Rehabil 2005; 32: 433-440.
50. Ferrari M, Vichi A, Feilzer AJ. Advances in operative dentistry, challenges to the future. Bölüm 8: Materials and luting cements for indirect restorations. 2001. Sayfa; 95- 107.
51. Council on Dental Materials, Instruments, and Equipment. Revised ANSI/ADA specification no. 5* for dental casting alloys. J Am Dent Assoc 1989; 118:379.
52. Anusavice KJ, Chiayi S, Rawls HR. Phillips' science of dental materials. 12th edn. Elsevier Health Sciences: Philadelphia; 2012.
53. White SN. Posterior restorations: change, challenge and controversy. J Calif Dent Assoc 1996; 24: 14-16.
54. Cekic Nagas I, Egilmez F, Ergun G, Vallittu PK, et al. Load-bearing capacity of novel resin-based fixed dental prosthesis materials. Dent Mater J 2016, basımda.
55. Garber DA, Ronald EG. Porcelain & composite inlays & onlays: esthetic posterior restorations. Chicago: Quintessence; 1994.
56. Qualtrough AJ, Wilson NH, Smith GA. Porcelain inlay: a historical view. Oper Dent 1990; 15: 61-70.
57. Tinschert J, Zwez D, Marx R. Anusavice KJ. Structural reliability of alumina-, feldspar-, leucite-, mica-and zirconia-based ceramics. J Dent 2000; 28: 529-535.
58. Jedynakiewicz NM, Martin N. CEREC: science, research, and clinical application. Compendium of continuing education in dentistry 2001; 22: 7-13.
59. Hannig C, Westphal C, Becker K, Attin T. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 94: 342-349.
60. Bindl A, Mormann WH. Clinical evaluation of adhesively placed Cerec endo-crowns after 2 years-preliminary results. J Adhes Dent 1999; 1: 255-266.
61. Veselinović V, Todorović A, Lisjak D. Lazić V. Restoring endodontically treated teeth with all-ceramic endo-crowns: case report. Stomatol Glas Srbije 2008; 55: 54-64.
62. Sadan A. Biomechanical considerations for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review of the literature, Part II (Evaluation of fatigue behavior, interfaces, and in vivo studies). Quintessence Int 2008; 39: 117-129.
63. Biacchi GR, Basting RT. Comparison of fracture strength of endocrowns and glass fiber post-retained conventional crowns. Oper Dent 2012; 37: 130-136.
64. Rocca GT, Saratti CM, Poncet A, Feilzer AJ, Krejci I. The influence of FRCs reinforcement on marginal adaptation of CAD/CAM composite resin endocrowns after simulated fatigue loading. Odontology 2016; 104: 220-232.
65. Cekic-Nagas I, Ergun G, Egilmez F, Vallittu PK, Lassila LVJ. Micro-shear bond strength of different resin cements to ceramic/glass-polymer CAD-CAM block materials. J Prosthodont Res 2016; 60: 265-273.
66. El-Damanhoury HM, Haj-Ali RN, Platt JA. Fracture resistance and microleakage of endocrowns utilizing three CAD-CAM blocks. Oper Dent 2015; 40: 201-210.
67. Zarone F, Simona R, Sorrentino R. From porcelain-fused-to-metal to zirconia: clinical and experimental considerations. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 83-96.
68. Fages M, Bennasar B. The endocrown: a different type of all-ceramic reconstruction for molars. J Can Dent Assoc 2013; 79:d140.
69. Bindl A, Richter B, Mörmann WH. Survival of ceramic computer-aided design/manufacturing crowns bonded to preparations with reduced macroretention geometry. Int J Prosthod 2005; 18: 219-224.
70. Sedrez-Porto JA, Rosa WL, da Silva AF, Münchow EA, Pereira-Cenci T. Endocrown restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016; 52: 8-14.
71. Aktas G, Yerlikaya H, Akca K. Mechanical failure of endocrowns manufactured with different ceramic materials: An in vitro biomechanical study. J Prosthodont. 2016; 28. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12499.
72. Zoidis P, Bakiri E, Polyzois G. Using modified polyetheretherketone (PEEK) as an alternative material for endocrown restorations: A short-term clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117: 335-339.
73. Cekic Nagas, I, Nagas, E , Egilmez, F , Ergun, G , Vallittu, P , et al . Fracture load of ceramic crowns supported by some novel anchoring dental systems. Acta Odontologica Turcica 2017.b, doi: 10.17214/gaziaot.327867.
74. Robbins WJ, Hilton TJ, Schwartz SR. Fundamentals of operative dentistry a contemporary approach. Summit JB, editor. Quintessence: China; 2006.
75. Wittneben JG, Wright RF, Weber HP, Gallucci GO. A systematic review of the clinical performance of CAD/ CAM single-tooth restorations. Int J Prosthodont 2009; 22: 466-471.
76. Kiremitçi A, Bolay S, Gürgan S. Two-year performance of glass-ceramic insert-resin composite restorations: clinical and scanning electronmicroscopic evaluation. Quintessence Int 1998; 29: 417-421.
77. Rashid RJ, Ricks J, Monaghan RP. Strengths of condensable resin composite with flowable liners. Dent Mater 1999; 78: 156