The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 18 , ISSUE 6 ( June, 2017 ) > List of Articles


Choice of Endodontic Fiber Posts and its Influence on Dental Malpractice: An in vitro Evaluation

Houssam Jassar, Hassan El Husseini

Citation Information : Jassar H, Husseini HE. Choice of Endodontic Fiber Posts and its Influence on Dental Malpractice: An in vitro Evaluation. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18 (6):452-457.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2064

Published Online: 01-09-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; The Author(s).


Aims and objectives

The fiber post type used in restoring endodontically treated teeth may affect the dental expert decision in the case of dental malpractice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the low-cost commercial fiber post in comparison with a higher cost or well-known documented fiber post system.

Materials and methods

A total of 20 premolars were selected for the study; following endodontic treatment, specimens were randomly divided into two groups of 10 specimens each according to the type of fiber post used: (1) Low-cost commercial fiber post (OYAPost, Taper Lucent, OYARICOM) and (2) higher cost well-known fiber post (Rely X Fiber post, 3M ESPE). Both fiber posts were cemented using self-adhesive cement (Rely X Unicem). Samples were subjected to push-out bond strength and to failure analysis. One-way analysis of variance was used (p < 0.005).


There was no significant difference between the bond strength of the two tested groups (p > 0.05), while statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) was noted between the different post space regions (cervical, middle, and apical).


Based on the evidence from the study, it can be concluded that the type of fiber post should not affect the dental expert decision in the case of dental malpractice/lawsuit.

Clinical significance

All types of low-cost fiber posts may behave similarly to other higher cost or well-documented fiber posts.

How to cite this article

Ayoub F, Jassar H, El Husseini H, Salameh Z. Choice of Endodontic Fiber Posts and its Influence on Dental Malpractice: An in vitro Evaluation. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(6):452-457.

PDF Share
  1. Dental implant jurisprudence: avoiding the legal failures. J Indiana Dent Assoc 2002 Fall;81(3):29-34.
  2. Discourage malpractice lawsuits: a commonsense approach. J Calif Dent Assoc 1997 Mar;25(3):219-223.
  3. Reduce your malpractice risk. Top 10 documenting mistakes to avoid. J Mich Dent Assoc 2015 Dec;97(12):24-29.
  4. Medico-legal aspects of vertical root fractures in root filled teeth. Int Endod J 2012 Jan;45(1):7-11.
  5. Medico-legal aspects of altered sensation following endodontic treatment: a retrospective case series. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011 Jul;112(1):126-131.
  6. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post systems. J Prosthet Dent 2002 Apr;87(4):431-437.
  7. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strain and stress distributions in endodontically treated maxillary central incisors restored with different post, core and crown materials. Dent Mater 2007 Aug;23(8):983-993.
  8. A systematic review of factors associated with the retention of glass fiber posts. Braz Oral Res 2015 Jun;29(1):pii.
  9. Effect of root canal preparation, type of endodontic post and mechanical cycling on root fracture strength. J Appl Oral Sci 2014 May-Jun;22(3):165-173.
  10. Clinical performance of fiber post restorations in endodontically treated teeth: 2-year results. Int J Prosthodont 2007 May-Jun;20(3):293-298.
  11. Retrospective study of the clinical performance of fiber posts. Am J Dent 2000 May;13(Spec No):9B-13B.
  12. Risk factors for failure of glass fiber-reinforced composite post restorations: a prospective observational clinical study. Eur J Oral Sci 2005 Dec;113(6):519-524.
  13. Fracture resistance and failure patterns of endodontically treated mandibular molars restored using resin composite with or without translucent glass fiber posts. J Endod 2006 Aug;32(8):752-755.
  14. Effect of different all-ceramic crown system on fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with and without glass fiber posts. J Endod 2007 Jul;33(7):848-851.
  15. Reliability of fiber post bonding to root canal dentin after simulated clinical function in vitro. Oper Dent 2012 Jul-Aug;37(4):397-405.
  16. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth with major hard tissue loss – bond strength of conventionally and adhesively luted fiber-reinforced composite posts. Dent Traumatol 2013 Oct;29(5):339-354.
  17. Effect of post material and length on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars: an in-vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2015 Jul;7(7):22-28.
  18. Fatigue surviving, fracture resistance, shear stress and finite element analysis of glass fiber posts with different diameters. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2015 Mar;43:69-77.
  19. Clinical outcomes and success rates of quartz fiber post restorations: a retrospective study. J Prosthet Dent 2015 Sep;114(3):367-372.
  20. Can cement film thickness influence bond strength and fracture resistance of fiber reinforced composite posts? Clin Oral Investig 2016 May;20(4):849-855.
  21. Geometric factors affecting dentin bonding in root canals: a theoretical modeling approach. J Endod 2005 Aug;31(8):584-589.
  22. Effect on the bond strengths of glass fiber posts functionalized with polydopamine after etching with hydrogen peroxide. Dent Mater J 2015 Mar;34(6):740-745.
  23. The contribution of friction to the dislocation resistance of bonded fiber posts. J Endod 2005 Aug;31(8):608-612.
  24. Influence of eugenol-based sealers on push-out bond strength of fiber post luted with resin cement: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endod 2015 Sep;41(9):1418-1423.
  25. Influence of cement type and relining procedure on push-out bond strength of fiber posts after cyclic loading. J Prosthodont 2016 Jan;25(1):54-60.
  26. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated permanent anterior teeth restored with three different esthetic post systems: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2015 Sep;33(4):296-301.
  27. Laboratory assessment of the retentive potential of adhesive posts: a review. J Dent 2007 Nov;35(11):827-835.
  28. Effect of cement type and water storage time on the push-out bond strength of a glass fiber post. Braz Dent J 2011;22(5):359-364.
  29. Push-out bond strength evaluation of glass fiber posts with different resin cements and application techniques. Oper Dent 2016 Jan-Feb;41(1):103-110.
  30. Dual and self-curing potential of self-adhesive resin cements as thin films. Oper Dent 2011 Nov-Dec;36(6):635-642.
  31. Microtensile bond strength between adhesive cements and root canal dentin. Dent Mater 2003 May;19(3):199-205.
  32. Bonding effectiveness and sealing ability of fiber-post bonding. Dent Mater 2008 Jul;24(7):967-977.
  33. Penetration of bonding resins into fibre-reinforced composite posts: a confocal microscopic study. Int Endod J 2005 Jan;38(1):46-51.
  34. A simple etching technique for improving the retention of fiber posts to resin composites. J Endod 2006 Jan;32(1):44-47.
  35. Regional bond strengths of a dual-cure resin core material to translucent quartz fiber post. Am J Dent 2006 Feb;19(1):51-55.
  36. Clinically significant factors in dowel design. J Prosthet Dent 1984 Jul;52(1):28-35.
  37. The adhesion between fiber posts and root canal walls: comparison between microtensile and push-out bond strength measurements. Eur J Oral Sci 2004 Aug;112(4):353-361.
  38. Microtensile bond strength of light- and self-cured adhesive systems to intraradicular dentin using a translucent fiber post. Oper Dent 2005 Jul-Aug;30(4):500-506.
  39. Bonding to root canal: structural characteristics of the substrate. Am J Dent 2000 Oct;13(5):255-260.
  40. In vitro evaluation of endodontic posts. Am J Dent 2000 Jun;13(Spec No):5B-8B.
  41. Bond strength performance of different resin composites used as core materials around fiber posts. Dent Mater 2007 Jan;23(1):95-99.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.