title: Clinical evaluation of a carbon fibre reinforced carbon endodontic post.
abstract: This study reports a prospective clinical trial comparing a carbon fibre reinforced carbon (CFRC) endodontic post with a conventional prefabricated post. Twenty-seven single rooted maxillary anterior teeth in 18 patients (nine males and nine females; age range 18-60 years) were restored either with a CFRC post or a wrought precious alloy control. Cast type III gold alloy cores were used in conjunction with both post groups. The CRFC posts (n = 16) were cemented with a composite luting agent and the conventional posts (control) were cemented with zinc phosphate. Four failures were recorded in the CFRC post group at 24, 29, 56 and 87 months, compared with one failure in the control group at 84 months. These results suggest that post-retained crowns utilizing a CFRC material and a composite resin luting agent do not perform as well as conventional wrought precious alloy posts.
authors.affiliation: Division of Restorative Dentistry, University of Bristol Dental School, Bristol, UK.
authors.forename: P A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: King
authors.forename: D J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Setchell
authors.forename: J S
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Rees
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D002244:Carbon / Q000737:chemistry*; D000077482:Carbon Fiber; D003442:Crowns / Q000592:standards; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D005260:Female; D006047:Gold Alloys / Q000737:chemistry*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011176:Post and Core Technique / Q000592:standards; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials / Q000627:therapeutic use; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D015036:Zinc Phosphate Cement / Q000737:chemistry
chemical_list: D000077482:Carbon Fiber; D006047:Gold Alloys; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials; D002244:Carbon; D015036:Zinc Phosphate Cement