Is a fiber post better than a metal post for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate systematically the evidence about the failure rates of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) restored with intraradicular metal posts (MPs) or fiber posts (FPs).The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020189792). Eligibility criteria included randomized clinical trials (RCT) and prospective clinical trials (PCT) that compared the failures between FP and MP restorations for ETT. Meta-analyses were conducted for failure rates using fixed- and random-effects models. Subgroup and funnel plot analyses were performed.Four electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library), manual, and grey literature were screened by two researchers independently for articles published until November 2020 without language or time restrictions. For the analysis of the risk of bias, the Cochrane collaboration tool and ROBINS-I were used. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE.Ten studies were included. A total of 704 participants with a mean age of 42.7 years with a total of 844 ETT were restored using 453 FPs and 391 MPs. The FPs presented similar failures to that with MPs (P=0.39; risk ratio [RR]:0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52 to 1.29). Subgroup analysis showed no significant differences between the FPs and MPs for the anterior region (P=0.60; RR:0.88; [CI]: 0.54 to 1.42), posterior region (P=0.52; RR:1.18; [CI]: 0.71 to 1.98), root fracture (P=0.44; RR:0.78; [CI]: 0.41 to 1.49), and debonding (P=0.56; RR:1.27; [CI]: 0.57 to 2.80). Additionally, FP showed similar failures compared with those of cast (P=0.36; RR:0.63; [CI]: 0.23 to 1.72) and prefabricated MPs (P=0.68; RR:0.90; [CI]: 0.54 to 1.50). The RCT and PCT studies revealed a low risk of bias for most of the domains. However, the certainty of evidence was considered low.No evidence of difference was observed for failure rates between FPs, and MPs, independent of region and different MPs used in ETT. However, further well-conducted clinical studies with high-quality evidence are encouraged.Our results indicate that both retainer posts can be considered an adequate alternative in restoring ETT. Therefore, the choice of post (fiber or metal) could be based on dentist preference or individual characteristics of the patient as the failure rates for different posts are similar.