Statement of problem

The best protocol to restore endodontically treated teeth is still unclear, with many factors to be considered, including the selection and necessity of a post, the type of coronal restoration, the amount of remaining coronal structure, and the type of luting agent.

Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the restorative preferences for endodontically treated teeth between dentists and dental students.

Material and methods

Survey studies, written in English, of dentists and dental students, which evaluated the use of intracanal posts and other restorative options for endodontically treated teeth, were selected. Searches were performed in the PubMed and SCOPUS databases without time restriction. Screening and data extraction were performed by 2 researchers independently. A standardized outline was used to extract the data (questions related to the theme and the response rate of each question on the survey), and the risk of bias was assessed. Descriptive analysis was performed of the collected information.

Results

Twenty-five articles were included. Most dentists who answered the surveys reported the time since graduation as 1 to 20 years (40%), and 44% were specialists. The most reported choices concerning the type of posts used were prefabricated posts (45.8%), cast metal posts (16.7%), and both posts (16.7%). The cast metal posts were cited more frequently in surveys published between 1994 and 2010, whereas prefabricated posts, both metal and glass fiber ones, were cited between 2006 and 2019. The preferred luting agent for intracanal posts was resin-based (47%). These choices seem to have been influenced by time and by the level of postgraduate training.

Conclusions

Restorative preferences related to posts have changed over time, from the use of cast posts to prefabricated ones or the use of both posts and seem to be influenced by experience and postgraduate training.

中文翻译：

---

牙医和学生对牙髓治疗牙齿的修复偏好和选择：调查研究的系统回顾

问题陈述

修复牙髓治疗牙齿的最佳方案仍不清楚，需要考虑的因素很多，包括桩的选择和必要性、冠修复的类型、剩余冠结构的数量以及粘接剂的类型。

目的

本系统评价的目的是评估牙医和牙科学生对牙髓治疗牙齿的修复偏好。

材料与方法

选择了以英语撰写的牙医和牙科学生的调查研究，这些研究评估了根管治疗牙齿的根管内桩和其他修复方案的使用情况。在 PubMed 和 SCOPUS 数据库中进行搜索，没有时间限制。筛选和数据提取由2名研究人员独立完成。使用标准化的大纲提取数据（与主题相关的问题和调查中每个问题的回答率），并评估偏倚风险。对收集到的信息进行描述性分析。

结果

收录了 25 篇文章。大多数回答调查的牙医报告毕业后的时间为 1 到 20 年 (40%)，44% 是专家。报告最多的关于所用支柱类型的选择是预制支柱 (45.8%)、铸造金属支柱 (16.7%) 和两种支柱 (16.7%)。在 1994 年至 2010 年发表的调查中，更频繁地引用了铸造金属柱，而在 2006 年至 2019 年期间，引用了金属和玻璃纤维预制柱。用于根管内柱的首选粘接剂是树脂基的（47%）。这些选择似乎受到时间和研究生培训水平的影响。

结论

与桩相关的修复偏好随着时间的推移发生了变化，从使用铸造桩到预制桩或同时使用桩，似乎受到经验和研究生培训的影响。