Why, when and how are endodontically treated teeth restored
A questionnaire-based study comparing the decision-making of dentists in Germany and Switzerland
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61872/sdj-2025-04-01PMID:
41347313Keywords:
endodontics, post-endodontic treatment, root-canal post, e-survey, treatment decisionAbstract
Post-endodontic treatment preferences can be influenced by educational, healthcare, financial, and historical factors. This study aimed to compare the post-endodontic treatment choices – particularly post and single-crown placement – of dentists in Germany and Switzerland. From August to November 2023, a questionnaire was distributed amongst 334 Swiss and 570 German dentists. A total of 50 Swiss dentists (response rate: 15.0%) and 60 German dentists (response rate: 10.5%) completed the survey. Descriptive analyses were conducted, and data presented as percentages. German dentists reported placing posts in 5–20% of endodontically treated teeth, whereas most Swiss dentists did so in less than 5%. Swiss dentists (58%) tended to place posts in teeth with 0–40% remaining tooth structure, while German dentists (60%) began at 40–70%. Regarding post-endodontic restorations, the majority of German dentists (67%) preferred single crowns, whereas most Swiss dentists (68%) favored composite-resin fillings and maintained even teeth with severely reduced coronal hard tissue. These trends were further supported by responses to various clinical case scenarios.
References
1. Hargreaves KM, Cohen S, Berman LH. Cohen’s pathways of the pulp. 10th ed. St. Lou-is, Mo.: Mosby Elsevier; 2011.
2. Davies A, Foschi F, Patel S. Endodontology at a glance. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2018. 103 p. (At a glance series).
3. Mannocci F, Bhuva B, Roig M, Zarow M, Bitter K. European Society of Endodontology position statement: The restoration of root filled teeth. Int Endod J. 2021;54(11):1974–81.
4. Naumann M, Metzdorf G, Fokkinga W, Watzke R, Sterzenbach G, Bayne S, et al. In-fluence of test parameters on in vitro fracture resistance of post‐endodontic restorations: a structured review. J Oral Rehabil. 2009;36(4):299–312.
5. Sorensen J, Berge H, Edelhoff D. Selection criteria for post and core materials in the restoration of endodontically treated teeth. Proc Conf Sci Crit Sel Mater Tech Clin Dent. 2001;15:67-84.
6. Balkenhol M, Wöstmann B, Rein C, Ferger P. Sur-vival time of cast post and cores: A 10-year retro-spective study. J Dent. 2007;35(1):50–58.
7. Bateli M, Kern M, Wolkewitz M, Strub JR, Att W. A retrospective evaluation of teeth restored with zirconia ceramic posts: 10-year results. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(4):1181–1187.
8. Bruhnke M, Wierichs RJ, Von Stein-Lausnitz M, Meyer-Lückel H, Beuer F, Naumann M, et al. Long-term survival of adhesively luted post-endodontic restorations. J Endod. 2022;48(5):606–613.
9. Doshi, Krisha, Sharma S. Clinical practice guidelines for choice of post-endodontic restorations. Int J Dent Oral Sci. 2021;28:2875–2879.
10. Fokkinga WA, Kreulen CM, Bronkhorst EM, Creu-gers NHJ. Up to 17-year controlled clinical study on post-and-cores and covering crowns. J Dent. 2007;35(10):778–86.
11. Robbins JW. Restoration of the endodontically treated tooth. Dent Clin N Am. 2002;46(2):367–384.
12. Juloski J, Radovic I, Goracci C, Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M. Ferrule effect: a literature re-view. J Endod. 2012;38(1):11–9.
13. Naumann M, Neuhaus KW, Kölpin M, Seemann R. Why, when, and how general prac-titioners re-store endodontically treated teeth: a representa-tive survey in Germany. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(2):253–259.
14. Eckerbom M, Dr O, Magnusson T, Dr O. Restoring Endodontically Treated Teeth: A Survey of Current Opinions Among Board-Certified Prosthodontists and General Dental Prac-titioners in Sweden. Int J Prosthodont. 2001;14(3):245–249.
15. Seow LL, Toh CG, Wilson NH. A Survey of Current Practices among General Dental Practitioners in Manchester in 2002. Prim Dent Care. 2003;10(3):87–92.
16. Naumann M, Kiessling S, Seemann R. Treatment concepts for restoration of endo-dontically trea-ted teeth: A nationwide survey of dentists in Germany. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96(5):332–328.
17. Kon M, Zitzmann NU, Weiger R, Krastl G. Posten-dodontic restoration: a survey among dentists in Switzerland. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed. 2013;123:1076–1088.
18. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Festzuschuss-Richtlinien. 2024. B1.17.01.2025 https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/62-492-3701/FZ-RL_2024-11-21_iK-2025-01-01.pdf (ac-cessed 22.07.2025).
19. Ferrari M, Pontoriero DIK, Ferrari Cagidiaco E, Car-boncini F. Restorative difficulty evaluation system of endodontically treated teeth. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022;34(1):65–80.
20. Naumann M, Schmitter M, Krastl G. Postendodon-tic restoration: endodontic post-and-core or no post at all? J Adhes Dent. 2018;20(1):19–24.
21. Bitter K, Noetzel J, Stamm O, Vaudt J, Meyer-Lueckel H, Neumann K, et al. Random-ized clinical trial comparing the effects of post placement on failure rate of postendodontic restorations: preli-minary results of a mean period of 32 months. J Endod. 2009;35(11):1477–1482.
22. Maklennan A, Roccuzzo A, Kramer E, G Campus, Naumann M, Meyer-Lueckel H, et al. Long-term success and survival of post-endodontic restora-tions without posts after up to 18 years: A prac-tice-based study. J Dent 2025. 154:105569.
23. Naumann M, Blankenstein F, Kießling S, Dietrich T. Risk factors for failure of glass fiber‐reinforced composite post restorations: a prospective obser-vational clinical study. Eur J Oral Sci. 2005 Dec;113(6):519–524.
24. Naumann M, Reich S, Nothdurft FP, Beuer F, Schirrmeister JF, Dietrich T. Survival of glass fiber post restoration over 5 years. Am J Dent. 2008;21(4):267–272.
25. Schmitter M, Hamadi K, Rammelsberg P. Survivial of two post systems-five-year re-sults of a ran-domized clinical trial. Quintessence Int. 2011;42(10):843–850.
26. Torbjörner A, Fransson B. A literature review on the prosthetic treatment of structur-ally compro-mised teeth. Int J Prosthodont; 2004;17:369-376.
27. Bundesrat. Verordnung zur Neuregelung der zahnärztlichen Ausbildung. 2019.
28. Cloet E, Debels E, Neart I. Controlled clinical trial on the outcome of glass fiber com-posite cores versus wrought posts and cast cores fot the resto-ration of endodontically treat-ed teeth: a 5 year follow up study. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;(30):71–79.
29. Sarkis-Onofre R, Jacinto RC, Boscato. Cast metal vs. glass fibre posts: a randomized controlled trial with up to 3 years of follow up. J Dent. 2014;(42):582–587.
30. Sterzenbach G, Franke A, Naumann M. Rigid versus flexible dentine-like endodontic posts—clinical testing of a biomechanical concept: seven-year results of a randomized con-trolled clinical pilot trial on endodontically treated abutment teeth with severe hard tissue loss. J Endod. 2012;38(12):1557–1563.
31. Wang X, Shu X, Zhang Y, Yang B, Joan Y, Zhao K. Evaluation of fiber posts vs metal posts for restor-ing severely damaged endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review and meta- analysis. Quintessence Int. 2019;50(1):8–20.
32. Naumann M, Schmitter M, Frankenberger R, Krastl G. “Ferrule Comes First. Post Is Second!” Fake News and Alternative Facts? A Systematic Review. J Endod. 2018;44(2):212–219.
33. Athithan P, Rossi-Fedele G, Ibrahim A. Current concepts for restoring root canal treated teeth: A survey of Australian and New Zealand dentists. NZ Dent J. 2024;20:119–126.
34. Bhuva B, Giovarruscio M, Rahim N, Bitter K, Man-nocci F. The restoration of root filled teeth: a re-view of the clinical literature. Int Endod J. 2021;54(4):509–535.
35. De Kuijper MCFM, Cune MS, Özcan M, Gresnigt MMM. Clinical performance of direct composite resin versus indirect restorations on endodonti-cally treated posterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(3):295–306.
36. Sequeira-Byron P, Fedorowicz Z, Carter B, Nasser M, Alrowaili EF. Single crowns ver-sus conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth. Cochrane Oral Health Group, editor. Cochrane Da-tabase Syst Rev 2015 (9): Cd009109.
37. Da Veiga AMA, Cunha AC, Ferreira DMTP, Da Silva Fidalgo TK, Chianca TK, Reis KR, et al. Longevity of direct and indirect resin composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016;54:1–12.
38. Swiss Society of Reconstructive Dentistry SSRD. Rehabilitation von Geburtsgebrechen nach dem 20. Lebensjahr. SSO – Scientific Clinical Topics. Swiss Dent J. 2024;5:75–76.
39. Zitzmann N. Point of Care: When restoring the teeth of partially edentulous patients with remov-able partial dentures, do you consider placing im-plants to enhance the retention and stability of the prosthesis? J Canad Dent Assoc. 2005;71:551–552.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Levke S. Melfsen, Anastasia Maklennan, Gabriel Magnucki, Michael Neumann, Nicola U. Zitzmann, Klaus W. Neuhaus
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
