Comparison between endocrown fracture resistance with post core crown

Yohanes Paulus Krisna; Ira Tanti

doi:10.46934/ijp.v1i1.5

Yohanes Paulus Krisna [SCOPUS ID 57209177806] Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia
Ira Tanti Prosthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Indonesia University, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46934/ijp.v1i1.5

Abstract

The concept of minimally invasive restoration has been more approached lately, with the aim of preserve the remaining tooth structure especially after endodotic treatment. Endocrown is one type of restoration that might be the solution. Endocrown is made of glass-ceramic material, defined as a single restoration that uses pulp cham-bers as a retention and resistance form, margin of preparation is above the gingiva in order to preserve tooth structure. Endocrown was initiated by Pissis in 1995 and popularized by Bindl and Mörmann in 1999. According to late research, crown endocrown has higher fracture resistance than post-core crown. Although the literature on endocrown is still limited, empirical evidence leads to positive view for the use of this restoration.

Author Biography

Yohanes Paulus Krisna, [SCOPUS ID 57209177806] Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia

http://sinta.ristekbrin.go.id/authors/detail?id=6015166&view=overview

References

Aurélio M, Carvalho D. Current options concerning the endodontically-treated teeth restoration with the adhesive approach Partial restorations versus full Preserving the coronal structure. 2018;32:147-158.

Ao PM, Bruzi CG. Influence of no-ferrule and no-post buildup design on the fatigue resistance of endo-dontically treated molars restored with resin nanoceramic CAD/CAM crowns. 2014:595-602. doi:10.2341/ 13-004-L

Naumann M, Schmitter M, Frankenberger R, Krastl G. ‘“ Ferrule Comes First . Post Is Second !”’ Fake News and Alternative Facts ? A Systematic Review. J Endod. 2017. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2017.09.020

Einhorn M, Duvall N, Wajdowicz M, Brewster J, Roberts H. Preparation ferrule design effect on endocrown failure resistance. 2019:237-242. doi:10.1111/jopr.12671

Derleme E, Sevİmlİ G, Cengİz S, Oruç MS. Endocrowns: review. 2015;49(2):57-63.

Sedrez-porto JA, Luiz W, Oliveira D, Fernandes A, Münchow EA, Pereira-cenci T. Endocrown restorations : A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016;52:8-14. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2016.07.005

Güngör MB, Bal BT, Yilmaz H, Aydin C, Nemlİ SK. Fracture strength of CAD / CAM fabricated lithium disilicate and resin nano ceramic restorations used for endodontically treated teeth. 2017. doi:10.4012/dmj.2016-017

Atash R, Arab M, Duterme H, Cetik S. Comparison of resistance to fracture between three types of perma-nent restorations subjected to shear force : An in vitro study. 2017:239-249. doi:10.4103/jips.jips

Article O. Fracture load of nano-ceramic composite material for anterior endocrown restorations. 2020; 23 (1):1-9. doi:10.14295/bds.2020.v23i1.1853

Sedrez-porto A, Aldrighi E, Sergio M, Pereira-cenci T. J Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials Which materials would account for a better mechanical behavior for direct endocrown restorations? 2020;103 (December 2019). doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.103592

Patrick R, Schmidlin PR, Fh D, Deabreu D. Restorative dentistry fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth without ferrule using a novel H-shaped short post. 2015;46(2):97-109. doi:10.3290/j.qi.a32634

Guo J, Wang Z, Li X, Sun C, Gao E, Li H. A comparison of the fracture resistances of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and glass fiber post-core retained conventional crowns. 2016:489-93.

Haumahu D, Schepke U. Fracture strength of various types of large direct composite and indirect glass cera-mic restorations. doi:10.2341/18-111-L

Magne P, Lazari PC, Carvalho MA, Johnson T DBCA. Ferrule-effect dominates over use of a fiber post when restoring endodontically treated incisors : an in vitro study. Oper Dent. 2017;42:396-406. doi:10.2341/ 16-243-L