Abstract:Background: Endodontic treatment involves removal of the dental pulp and its replacement by a root canal filling. Restoration of root filled teeth can be challenging due to structural differences between vital and non-vital root-filled teeth. Direct restoration involves placement of a restorative material e.g. amalgam or composite, directly into the tooth. Indirect restorations consist of cast metal or ceramic (porcelain) crowns. The choice of restoration depends on the amount of remaining tooth, and may influence durability and cost. The decision to use a post and core in addition to the crown is clinician driven. The comparative clinical performance of crowns or conventional fillings used to restore root-filled teeth is unknown. This review updates the original, which was published in 2012. Objectives: To assess the effects of restoration of endodontically treated teeth (with or without post and core) by crowns versus conventional filling materials. Search methods: We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE via OVID, CINAHL via EBSCO, LILACS via BIREME. We also searched the reference lists of articles and ongoing trials registries.There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. The search is up-to-date as of 26 March 2015. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials in participants with permanent teeth that have undergone endodontic treatment. Single full coverage crowns compared with any type of filling materials for direct restoration or indirect partial restorations (e.g. inlays and onlays). Comparisons considered the type of post and core used (cast or prefabricated post), if any. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trial and assessed its risk of bias. We carried out data analysis using the 'treatment as allocated' patient population, expressing estimates of intervention effect for dichotomous data as risk ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results: We included one trial, which was judged to be at high risk of performance, detection and attrition bias. The 117 participants with a root-filled, premolar tooth restored with a carbon fibre post, were randomised to either a full coverage metal-ceramic crown or direct adhesive composite restoration. None experienced a catastrophic failure (i.e. when the restoration cannot be repaired), although only 104 teeth were included in the final, three-year assessment. There was no clear difference between the crown and composite group and the composite only group for non-catastrophic failures of the restoration (1/54 versus 3/53; RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 3.05) or failures of the post (2/54 versus 1/53; RR 1.96; 95% CI 0.18 to 21.01) at three years. The quality of the evidence for these outcomes is very low. There was no evidence available for any of our secondary outcomes: patient satisfaction and quality of life, incidence or recurrence of caries, periodontal health status, and costs. Authors' conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to assess the effects of crowns compared to conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth. Until more evidence becomes available, clinicians should continue to base decisions about how to restore root-filled teeth on their own clinical experience, whilst taking into consideration the individual circumstances and preferences of their patients.

Who wears the crown? Comparing 3D-printed resin crowns to preformed stainless steel crowns for restoring primary molars

Comparison of three-dimensional printed resin crowns and preformed stainless steel crowns for primary molar restorations: a randomized controlled trial

Evaluation of the clinical application of personalized 3D printing and CAD/CAM resin crowns to replace stainless steel crowns in paediatric dentistry

Outcome of Teeth Restored with CAD/CAM Zirconium Dioxide Post-Cores: a Retrospective Study with a Follow-Up Period of 3–6 Years

Preformed Stainless-Steel Crowns: Their Effects on Oral Hygiene Maintenance and Gingival Health - A Prospective Original Research

Clinical Evaluation of Zirconia and Stainless-Steel crowns in Primary Molars - A Randomized Control Trial

Clinical evaluation of 3D-printed zirconia crowns fabricated by selective laser melting (SLM) for posterior teeth restorations: Short-term pilot study

A retrospective cohort study on 3D printed temporary crowns

Paedodontic preformed crowns in primary teeth and relative degree of dental wear

Evaluation of Wear on Primary Tooth Enamel and Fracture Resistance of Esthetic Pediatric Crowns Manufactured from Different Materials

Custom-made versus prefabricated zirconia crowns for primary molars: A 12-month follow-up

Comparative evaluation of clinical performance, child and parental satisfaction of Bioflx, zirconia and stainless steel crowns in pediatric patients

Gingival health, plaque accumulation, and restoration outcomes in deciduous anterior teeth: evaluating zirconia crowns versus composite resin strip crowns

Randomized, controlled clinical trial of bilayer ceramic and metal-ceramic crown performance

Comparative Evaluation of Polymethyl Methacrylate and Thermoforming Crowns as Semipermanent Crowns in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Clinical and radiographic assessment of zirconia and stainless-steel crowns in restoration of primary molars

Efficacy evaluation of zirconia crown on primary molars with caries defects

Assessment of Interleukin-6 Levels and Lactobacillus casei Counts in Pediatric Stainless Steel and Zirconia Crowns: A Comparative Study

Three-year clinical evaluation of two ceramic crown systems: a preliminary study

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth

Comparative Evaluation of Microbial Adhesion on Provisional Crowns Fabricated With Milled Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Conventional Acrylic Resin: A Prospective Clinical Trial