Download PDF
Zahnmedizin up2date 2010; 4(4): 395-412
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1250048
Endodontologie

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Postendodontische Versorgung

Michael Naumann
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
26 August 2010 (online)

Also available at
   
Podcasts
  Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Einleitung

Die postendodontische Versorgung ist das Bindeglied zwischen der endodontischen Zahnerhaltung und der erfolgreichen, dauerhaften prothetischen Versorgung. Perfektion in nur jeweils einem der beiden Teilbereiche wird nicht genügen, um dem Patientenziel des dauerhaften Kaukomforts zu genügen. Deshalb ist es wichtig, hier das richtige Verfahren zu wählen – und es hat sich viel getan in den letzten 10 Jahren. Während jahrzehntelang der gegossene Stiftstumpfaufbau (SSA) Mittel der Wahl war, so ist es heute der konfektionierte Aufbaustift in Kombination mit einem Kompositaufbau. Ob nun ein faserverstärkter oder metallischer Aufbaustift zu verwenden ist, wird eher durch Handling-Eigenschaften bestimmt. Der Trend geht jedoch in Richtung glas- bzw. quarzfaserverstärkter Materialien.

Literatur

  • 1 Ng Y L, Mann V, Rahbaran S et al. Outcome of primary root canal treatment: systematic review of the literature – part 1. Effects of study characteristics on probability of success.  Int Endod J. 2007;  40 921-939
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Iqbal M K, Kim S. For teeth requiring endodontic treatment, what are the differences in outcomes of restored endodontically treated teeth compared to implant-supported restorations?.  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;  22 Suppl 96-116
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Torabinejad M et al. Outcomes of root canal treatment and restoration, implant-supported single crowns, fixed partial dentures, and extraction without replacement: a systematic review.  J Prosthet Dent. 2007;  98 285-311
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Zitzmann N U, Weiger R. Wurzelkanalbehandlung versus Implantation.  Zahnmedizin up2date. 2009;  (4) 363-385
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Sedgley C M, Messer H H. Are endodontically treated teeth more brittle?.  J Endod. 1992;  18 332-335
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Papa J, Cain C, Messer H H. Moisture content of vital vs endodontically treated teeth.  Endod Dent Traumatol. 1994;  10 91-93
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Reeh E S, Douglas W H, Messer H H. Stiffness of endodontically treated teeth related to restoration technique.  J Dent Res. 1989;  68 540-544
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Panitvisai P, Messer H H. Cuspal deflection in molars in relation to endodontic and restorative procedures.  J Endod. 1995;  21 57-61
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lang H, Korkmaz Y, Schneider K et al. Impact of endodontic treatments on the rigidity of the root.  J Dent Res. 2006;  85 364-368
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Peroz I, Blankenstein F, Lange K P et al. Restoring endodontically treated teeth with posts and cores – a review.  Quintessence Int. 2005;  36 737-746
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Trabert K C, Caput A A, Abou-Rass M. Tooth fracture – a comparison of endodontic and restorative treatments.  J Endod. 1978;  4 341-345
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Trope M, Maltz D O, Tronstad L. Resistance to fracture of restored endodontically treated teeth.  Endod Dent Traumatol. 1985;  1 108-111
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Morgano S M, Brackett S E. Foundation restorations in fixed prosthodontics: current knowledge and future needs.  J Prosthet Dent. 1999;  82 643-657
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Fernandes A S, Dessai G S. Factors affecting the fracture resistance of post-core reconstructed teeth: a review.  Int J Prosthodont. 2001;  14 355-363
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Naumann M, Lange K-P. Ansichten und Techniken zur Rekonstruktion endodontisch behandelter Zähne – eine Umfrage unter Zahnärzten im Bundesgebiet.  Deutsch Zahnärztl Z. 2003;  58 280-285
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Sorensen J A, Martinoff J T. Clinically significant factors in dowel design.  J Prosthet Dent. 1984;  52 28-35
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Schmitter M, Rammelsberg P, Gabbert O et al. Influence of clinical baseline findings on the survival of 2 post systems: a randomized clinical trial.  Int J Prosthodont. 2007;  20 173-178
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Fokkinga W A. Post it? Reconstruction of the endodontically treated tooth. Thesis. Radboud University Nijmegen. – with summary in dutch 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Fokkinga W A, Kreulen C M, Vallittu P K et al. A structured analysis of in vitro failure loads and failure modes of fiber, metal, and ceramic post-and-core systems.  Int J Prosthodont. 2004;  17 476-482
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Morgano S M, Milot P. Clinical success of cast metal posts and cores.  J Prosthet Dent. 1993;  70 11-16
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Vichi A, Fraioli A, Davidson C L et al. Influence of thickness on color in multi-layering technique.  Dent Mater. 2007;  23 1584-1589
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Chandler N P, Qualtrough A J, Purton D G. Comparison of two methods for the removal of root canal posts.  Quintessence Int. 2003;  34 534-536
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Pegoretti A, Fambri L, Zappini G et al. Finite element analysis of a glass fibre reinforced composite endodontic post.  Biomaterials. 2002;  23 2667-2682
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ferrari M, Vichi A, Mannocci F et al. Retrospective study of the clinical performance of fiber posts.  Am J Dent. 2000;  13 9B-13B
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Fredriksson M, Astback J, Pamenius M et al. A retrospective study of 236 patients with teeth restored by carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts.  J Prosthet Dent. 1998;  80 151-157
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Ferrari M, Vichi A, Garcia-Godoy F. Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts and cast post and cores.  Am J Dent. 2000;  13 15B-18B
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Mannocci F, Qualtrough A J, Worthington H V et al. Randomized clinical comparison of endodontically treated teeth restored with amalgam or with fiber posts and resin composite: five-year results.  Oper Dent. 2005;  30 9-15
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Grandini S, Goracci C, Tay F R et al. Clinical evaluation of the use of fiber posts and direct resin restorations for endodontically treated teeth.  Int J Prosthodont. 2005;  18 399-404
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Malferrari S, Monaco C, Scotti R. Clinical evaluation of teeth restored with quartz fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts.  Int J Prosthodont. 2003;  16 39-44
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Glazer B. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth with carbon fibre posts – a prospective study.  J Can Dent Assoc. 2000;  66 613-618
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Mannocci F, Bertelli E, Sherriff M et al. Three-year clinical comparison of survival of endodontically treated teeth restored with either full cast coverage or with direct composite restoration.  J Prosthet Dent. 2002;  88 297-301
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Monticelli F, Grandini S, Goracci C et al. Clinical behavior of translucent-fiber posts: a 2-year prospective study.  Int J Prosthodont. 2003;  16 593-596
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Naumann M, Kiessling S, Seemann R. Treatment concepts for restoration of endodontically treated teeth: A nationwide survey of dentists in Germany.  J Prosthet Dent. 2006;  96 332-338
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Assif D, Gorfil C. Biomechanical considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth.  J Prosthet Dent. 1994;  71 565-567
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Guzy G E, Nicholls J I. In vitro comparison of intact endodontically treated teeth with and without endo-post reinforcement.  J Prosthet Dent. 1979;  42 39-44
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub J R. Einfluss des endodontischen Aufbaus auf die Frakturfestigkeit überkronter Frontzähne.  Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 1999;  54 637-640
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Baratieri L N, De Andrada M A, Arcari G M et al. Influence of post placement in the fracture resistance of endodontically treated incisors veneered with direct composite.  J Prosthet Dent. 2000;  84 180-184
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 38 McDonald A V, King P A, Setchell D J. In vitro study to compare impact fracture resistance of intact root-treated teeth.  Int Endod J. 1990;  23 304-312
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Sorensen J A, Engelman M J. Ferrule design and fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth.  J Prosthet Dent. 1990;  63 529-536
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Stankiewicz N R, Wilson P R. The ferrule effect: a literature review.  Int Endod J. 2002;  35 575-581
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Saupe W A, Gluskin A H, Radke jr. R A. A comparative study of fracture resistance between morphologic dowel and cores and a resin-reinforced dowel system in the intraradicular restoration of structurally compromised roots.  Quintessence Int. 1996;  27 483-491
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Caputo A A, Standlee J P. Pins and posts-why, when and how.  Dent Clin North Am. 1976;  20 299-311
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Tjan A H, Whang S B. Resistance to root fracture of dowel channels with various thicknesses of buccal dentin walls.  J Prosthet Dent. 1985;  53 496-500
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Yoldas O, Akova T, Uysal H. An experimental analysis of stresses in simulated flared root canals subjected to various post-core applications.  J Oral Rehabil. 2005;  32 427-432
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Naumann M, Blankenstein F, Lange K-P. Vorschlag zur Standardisierung von In-vitro Belastbarkeitsuntersuchungen an endodontisch behandelten Zähnen.  Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 2002;  57 554-557
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Pilo R, Tamse A. Residual dentin thickness in mandibular premolars prepared with gates glidden and ParaPost drills.  J Prosthet Dent. 2000;  83 617-623
    Google Scholar
  • 47 Attin T. Der Einfluß verstärkender Wurzelstifte auf die Frakturanfälligkeit endodontisch versorgter Zähne.  Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 1994;  49 586-589
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Steele A, Johnson B R. In vitro fracture strength of endodontically treated premolars.  J Endod. 1999;  25 6-8
    Google Scholar
  • 49 Ausiello P, De Gee A J, Rengo S et al. Fracture resistance of endodontically-treated premolars adhesively restored.  Am J Dent. 1997;  10 237-241
    Google Scholar
  • 50 Strub J R, Pontius O, Koutayas S. Survival rate and fracture strength of incisors restored with different post and core systems after exposure in the artificial mouth.  J Oral Rehabil. 2001;  28 120-124
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Testori T, Badinio M, Castagnola M. Vertical root fractures in endodonically treated teeth: a clinical survey of 36 cases.  J Endod. 1993;  19 87-91
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Sorensen J A, Martinoff J T. Intracoronal reinforcement and coronal coverage: a study of endodontically treated teeth.  J Prosthet Dent. 1984;  51 780-784
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Foley J, Saunders E, Saunders W P. Strength of core build-up materials in endodontically treated teeth restored by the post and core technique.  Am J Dent. 1997;  10 166-172
    Google Scholar
  • 54 Burke F J, Shaglouf A G, Combe E C et al. Fracture resistance of five pin-retained core build-up materials on teeth with and without extracoronal preparation.  Oper Dent. 2000;  25 388-394
    Google Scholar
  • 55 Bolhuis H P B, De Gee A J, Feilzer A J et al. Fracture strength of different core build-up designs.  Am J Dent. 2001;  14 286-290
    Google Scholar
  • 56 Yoldas O, Oztunc H, Tinaz C et al. Perforation risks associated with the use of Masserann endodontic kit drills in mandibular molars.  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004;  97 513-517
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Torbjorner A, Fransson B. A literature review on the prosthetic treatment of structurally compromised teeth.  Int J Prosthodont. 2004;  17 369-376
    Google Scholar
  • 58 Sorensen J, Ahn S, Berge H et al. Selection criteria for post and core materials in the restoration of endodontically treated teeth.  Proceedings of Conference on Scientific Criteria for Selecting Materials and Techniques in Clinical Dentistry. 2001;  15 67-84
    Google Scholar
  • 59 King P A, Setchell D J. An in vitro evaluation of a prototype CFRC prefabricated post developed for the restoration of pulpless teeth.  J Oral Rehabil. 1990;  17 599-609
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Assif D, Oren E, Marshak B L, Aviv I. Photoelastic analysis of stress transfer by endodontically treated teeth to the supporting structure using different restorative techniques.  J Prosthet Dent. 1989;  61 535-543
    Google Scholar
  • 61 Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A, Heitmann T. Stiffness, elastic limit, and strength of newer types of endodontic posts.  J Dent. 1999;  27 275-278
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Bae J M et al. The flexural properties of fiber-reinforced composite with light-polymerized polymer matrix.  Int J Prosthodont. 2001;  14 33-39
    Google Scholar
  • 63 Cormier C J, Burns D R, Moon P. In vitro comparison of the fracture resistance and failure mode of fiber, ceramic, and conventional post systems at various stages of restoration.  J Prosthodont. 2001;  10 26-36
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Newman M P, Yaman P, Dennison J et al. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite posts.  J Prosthet Dent. 2003;  89 360-367
    Google Scholar
  • 65 Bateman G, Ricketts D N, Saunders W P. Fibre-based post systems: a review.  Br Dent J. 2003;  195 43-48
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Isidor F, Odman P, Brondum K. Intermittent loading of teeth restored using prefabricated carbon fiber posts.  Int J Prosthodont. 1996;  9 131-136
    Google Scholar
  • 67 Bolhuis P, de Gee A, Feilzer A. Influence of fatigue loading on four post-and-core systems in maxillary premolars.  Quintessence Int. 2004;  35 657-667
    Google Scholar
  • 68 Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A. Bonding of resin cements to post materials: influence of surface energy characteristics.  J Adhes Dent. 2005;  7 231-234
    Google Scholar
  • 69 de Rijk W G. Removal of fiber posts from endodontically treated teeth.  Am J Dent. 2000;  13 19B-21B
    Google Scholar
  • 70 Gesi A, Magnolfi S, Goracci C, Ferrari M. Comparison of two techniques for removing fiber posts.  J Endod. 2003;  29 580-582
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Lindemann M, Yaman P, Dennison J B et al. Comparison of the efficiency and effectiveness of various techniques for removal of fiber posts.  J Endod. 2005;  31 520-522
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Castrisos T V, Palamara J E, Abbott P V. Measurement of strain on tooth roots during post removal with the Eggler post remover.  Int Endod J. 2002;  35 337-344
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Castrisos T, Abbott P V. A survey of methods used for post removal in specialist endodontic practice.  Int Endod J. 2002;  35 172-180
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Nissan J, Dmitry Y, Assif D. The use of reinforced composite resin cement as compensation for reduced post length.  J Prosthet Dent. 2001;  86 304-308
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Abramovitz L, Lev R, Fuss Z, Metzger Z. The unpredictability of seal after post space preparation: a fluid transport study.  J Endod. 2001;  27 292-295
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Wu M-K, Pehlivan Y et al. Microleakage along apical root fillings and cemented posts.  J Prosthet Dent. 1998;  79 264-269
    Google Scholar
  • 77 Goldman M, DeVitre R, White R et al. An SEM study of posts cemented with an unfilled resin.  J Dent Res. 1984;  63 1003-1005
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Reid L C, Kazemi R B, Meiers J C. Effect of fatigue testing on core integrity and post microleakage of teeth restored with different post systems.  J Endod. 2003;  29 125-131
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Schwartz R S, Robbins J W. Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a literature review.  J Endod. 2004;  30 289-301
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A. Finite element analysis of stresses in endodontically treated, dowel-restored teeth.  J Prosthet Dent. 2005;  94 321-329
    Google Scholar
  • 81 Li L L et al. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of weakened roots restored with different cements in combination with titanium alloy posts.  Chin Med J (Engl). 2006;  119 305-311
    Google Scholar
  • 82 Mendoza D B, Eakle W S, Kahl E A et al. Root reinforcement with a resin-bonded preformed post.  J Prosthet Dent. 1997;  78 10-14
    Google Scholar
  • 83 Ferrari M, Mannocci F, Vichi A, Cagidiaco M C, Mjor I A. Bonding to root canal: structural characteristics of the substrate.  Am J Dent. 2000;  13 255-260
    Google Scholar
  • 84 Bitter K, Paris S, Martus P, Schartner R, Kielbassa A M. A Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope investigation of different dental adhesives bonded to root canal dentine.  Int Endod J. 2004;  37 840-848
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Serafino C, Gallina G, Cumbo E et al. Surface debris of canal walls after post space preparation in endodontically treated teeth: a scanning electron microscopic study.  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004;  97 381-387
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Grandini S, Goracci C, Monticelli F et al. SEM evaluation of the cement layer thickness after luting two different posts.  J Adhes Dent. 2005;  7 235-240
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Bolhuis P, de Gee A, Feilzer A. The influence of fatigue loading on the quality of the cement layer and retention strength of carbon fiber post-resin composite core restorations.  Oper Dent. 2005;  30 220-227
    Google Scholar
  • 88 Drummond J L, Toepke T R, King T J. Thermal and cyclic loading of endodontic posts.  Eur J Oral Sci. 1999;  107 220-224
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Sano H, Kanemura N, Burrow M F et al. Effect of operator variability on dentin adhesion: students vs. dentists.  Dent Mater J. 1998;  17 51-58
    Google Scholar
  • 90 Van Meerbeek B et al. Technique-sensitivity of contemporary adhesives.  Dent Mater J. 2005;  24 1-13
    Google Scholar
  • 91 Chersoni S et al. In vivo fluid movement through dentin adhesives in endodontically treated teeth.  J Dent Res. 2005;  84 223-227
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Lloyd P M, Palik J F. The philosophies of dowel diameter preparation: a literature review.  J Prosthet Dent. 1993;  69 32-36
    Google Scholar
  • 93 Schwartz N L, Whitsett L D, Berry T G et al. Unserviceable crowns and fixed partial dentures: life-span and causes for loss of serviceability.  J Am Dent Assoc. 1970;  81 1395-1401
    Google Scholar
  • 94 Aquilino S A, Caplan D J. Relationship between crown placement and the survival of endodontically treated teeth.  J Prosthet Dent. 2002;  87 256-263
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Bergman B, Lundquist P, Sjogren U et al. Restorative and endodontic results after treatment with cast posts and cores.  J Prosthet Dent. 1989;  61 10-15
    Google Scholar
  • 96 Iqbal M K, Johansson A A, Akeel R F et al. A retrospective analysis of factors associated with the periapical status of restored, endodontically treated teeth.  Int J Prosthodont. 2003;  16 31-38
    Google Scholar
  • 97 Loney R W, Moulding M B, Ritsco R G. The effect of load angulation on fracture resistance of teeth restored with cast post and cores and crowns.  Int J Prosthodont. 1995;  8 247-251
    Google Scholar
  • 98 Hatzikyriakos A H, Reisis G I, Tsingos N. A 3-year postoperative clinical evaluation of posts and cores beneath existing crowns.  J Prosthet Dent. 1992;  67 454-458
    Google Scholar
  • 99 Decock V, De Nayer K, De Boever J A, Dent M. 18-year longitudinal study of cantilevered fixed restorations.  Int J Prosthodont. 1996;  9 331-340
    Google Scholar
  • 100 Caplan D J, Kolker J, Rivera E M et al. Relationship between number of proximal contacts and survival of root canal treated teeth.  Int Endod J. 2002;  35 193-199
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 101 Eckerbom M, Magnusson T, Martinsson T. Prevalence of apical periodontitis, crowned teeth and teeth with posts in a Swedish population.  Endod Dent Traumatol. 1991;  7 214-220
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 102 Naumann M, Rosentritt M, Preuss A et al. The effect of alveolar bone loss on the load capability of restored endodontically treated teeth: A comparative in vitro study.  J Dent. 2006;  34 790-795
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 103 Lynch C D, Burke F M, Ni Riordain R et al. The influence of coronal restoration type on the survival of endodontically treated teeth.  Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2004;  12 171-176
    Google Scholar
  • 104 Ferrari M, Mason P N, Goracci C et al. Collagen degradation in endodontically treated teeth after clinical function.  J Dent Res. 2004;  83 414-419
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 105 Rivera EM, Yamauchi M. Site comparisons of dentine collagen cross-links from extracted human teeth.  Arch Oral Biol. 1993;  38 541-546
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 106 Howe C A, McKendry D J. Effect of endodontic access preparation on resistance to crown-root fracture.  J Am Dent Assoc. 1990;  121 712-715
    Google Scholar
  • 107 Creugers N H, Mentink A G, Fokkinga W A et al. 5-year follow-up of a prospective clinical study on various types of core restorations.  Int J Prosthodont. 2005;  18 34-39
    Google Scholar
  • 108 Randow K, Glantz P O. On cantilever loading of vital and non-vital teeth. An experimental clinical study.  Acta Odontol Scand. 1986;  44 271-277
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 109 Caplan D J, Kolker J, Rivera E M et al. Relationship between number of proximal contacts and survival of root canal treated teeth.  Int Endod J. 2002;  35 193-199
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 110 Sorensen J A, Martinoff J T. Endodontically treated teeth as abutments.  J Prosthet Dent. 1985;  53 631-636
    Google Scholar
  • 111 Landolt A, Lang N P. [Results and failures in extension bridges. A clinical and roentgenological follow-up study of free-end bridges].  Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed. 1988;  98 239-244
    Google Scholar
  • 112 Rosentritt M, Sikora M, Behr M et al. In vitro fracture resistance and marginal adaptation of metallic and tooth-coloured post systems.  J Oral Rehabil. 2004;  31 675-681
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 113 Ferrari M, Vichi A, Garcia-Godoy F. Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts and cast post and cores.  Am J Dent. 2000;  13 15B-18B
    Google Scholar
  • 114 Ben-Ur Z, Zimmermann A M. Screw-type root canal post systems – accuracy and strength of root canal walls.  Quintessenz. 1983;  34 1325-1332
    Google Scholar
  • 115 Assif D, Gorfil C. Biomechanical considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth.  J Prosthet Dent. 1994;  71 565-567
    Google Scholar
  • 116 Wegner S M, Wolfart S, Kern M. In vivo study of the marginal integrity of composite resin buildups after full crown preparation.  J Adhes Dent. 2004;  6 151-155
    Google Scholar

Dr. Michael Naumann

Zahnärzte an der Kleinmachnover Schleuse

Wannseestr. 42

14532 Stahnsdorf

Phone: 03329/63262

Email: naumann@naumann-kiessling.de