Fracture Resistance of Primary Molars Restored with Endocrowns Versus Zirconia Crowns (An in Vitro Study)

Sabbah, Ayman; Kamel, Mostafa

doi:10.14295/bds.2021.v24i4.2626

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, Sabbah and Kamel (18) compared the strength of primary molars with endocrown restorations to zirconia crowns that were already made. In comparison to Endocrown, Zirconia Crown demonstrated statistically substantially greater mean fracture resistance (P = 0.001).Compared to primary molars restored with endocrowns, pulpotomized teeth with Zirconia crowns shown considerably higher mean fracture resistance; nonetheless, both restorations demonstrated mean fracture resistance greater than the maximal biting force in children.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…El Makawi and Khattab et al (1) revealed that compared to lithium disilicate endocrowns, Nusmile zirconia crowns had statistically significantly superior fracture resistance. Sabbah and Kamel (18) assessed the fracture resistance of primary molars restored with Endocrowns (ceram.x SphereTEC one universal, Dentsply Sirona, USA). El Makawi and Khattab (1) assessed the fracture resistance of primary molars restored with Endocrowns (IPS e.max Press/ Ivoclar Vivadent).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fracture Resistance of Endocrowns Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Endodontically Treated Primary Second Molar Teeth: An in vitro study

Mansour

Alameldin

Badreldin³

et al. 2023

Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the fracture resistance of pulpotomized primary molars restored using hybrid ceramics endocrowns and prefabricated zirconia crowns. Materials and methods: Eight freshly extracted human mandibular second primary molars underwent pulpotomy procedure. Teeth were randomly divided into two groups according to the type of coronal restoration: Endocrown (EC) group (n=4) restorations made of CAD/CAM Milled Hybrid Ceramic blocks (VITA ENAMIC), and Zirconia crown (ZC) group (n=4) restored by prefabricated zirconia crowns (Nu Smile). A universal testing machine was used to evaluate fracture resistance of tested specimens. Results: There was no statistically significant difference (P=0.074) in the mean fracture resistance for EC group (1968.6±985.4) compared to the mean fracture resistance for the ZC group (890.9±142.5). Conclusion: Endocrowns can be used as a treatment option in pulpotomized primary molar teeth. VITA ENAMIC endocrowns can withstand the maximum intraoral masticatory force in the primary molars.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture Resistance of Endocrowns Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Endodontically Treated Primary Second Molar Teeth: An in vitro study

Mansour

Alameldin

Badreldin³

et al. 2023

Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Its main characteristics include translucency, biocompatibility, high mechanical resistance, and color mimetics to obtain high aesthetic results [2]. Zirconium oxide ceramics (ZrO 2 , 3 rd generation) have been widely used in prosthetic dentistry, and the clinical success of restorations depends not only on esthetic or functional results but also on bond durability between dental tissues and prosthetic substrates [3][4][5][6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of short- and long-term bond strength of zirconia after different surface treatments

PINTO-PARDO,

ARAYA,

DEISCHLER

et al. 2023

Braz. Dent. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:The aim of the study was to evaluate the short and long-term effects of different surface treatments on the bond strengths of zirconia. Material and Methods: 225 blocks of sintered zirconia samples (4 x 4 x 3 mm) were divided into five groups and subjected to different surface treatments: control group (without surface treatment), alumina group (sandblasting [25-µm-aluminum-oxide]), alumina+Ambar Universal-APS (AU) group, CoJet group (silica-coated [30-μm silica-modified aluminum particles]), and CoJet+AU group. Subsequently, zirconia samples were cemented against resin samples (total dimensions: 8x8x6mm) and assigned to three storage conditions: dry, humid (artificial saliva at 37°C for 30-days) or thermocycling [100.000-cycles] (n=15 per group). The microtensile bond strength (µTBS) was determined using a universal testing machine. The failure modes were observed and analyzed using a stereomicroscope. Normality tests, descriptive statistics, and two-way ANOVA, followed by post-hoc comparisons, were performed to evaluate the effect of surface treatments and storage conditions on µTBS (α=0.05). Results: μTBS was influenced by surface treatment in the short and long-term (P<0.0001). The highest values were found in CoJet+AU in dry (33.51 ±2.48 MPa), humid (32.87 ±2.68 MPa) and thermocycling (21.37 ±1.68 MPa) storage conditions compared with others. Interestingly, no significant differences in μTBS were found among alum +AU and CoJet alone under any of the three storage conditions. Adhesive failure increased in all groups after thermocycling, but CoJet+AU had the lowest values of adhesive failure compared with others. Conclusion: The combination of CoJet and Ambar universal as a surface treatment for zirconia specimens provides significantly higher short and long-term bond strengths of adhesive cementation.

show abstract

Zirconia Crowns for Primary Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

Alzanbaqi

Alogaiel

Alasmari

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the literature regarding the clinical performance of zirconia crowns for primary teeth. Materials and Methods: Four electronic databases, Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. Clinical, observational, and laboratory studies were included. Studies that assessed the performance of zirconia crowns for primary teeth using outcomes such as gingival and periodontal health, parental satisfaction, color stability, crown retention, contour, fracture resistance, marginal integrity, surface roughness, and recurrent caries were included. Risk of bias was assessed using different assessment tools depending on the type of the assessed study. Results: Out of the 3058 retrieved records, 61 full-text records were assessed for eligibility. Thirty studies were included for qualitative analysis. The included studies reported that zirconia crowns for primary teeth were associated with better gingival and periodontal health, good retention, high fracture resistance, color stability, high parental acceptance, good marginal adaptation, smooth cosmetic surface, and no recurrent caries. Conclusion: Zirconia crowns are promising alternative to other restorative materials and crowns in the field of pediatric dentistry. They showed higher properties and performance in different clinical aspects and great parental satisfaction.

show abstract

Fracture Resistance of Primary Molars Restored with Endocrowns Versus Zirconia Crowns (An in Vitro Study)

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

Fracture Resistance of Endocrowns Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Endodontically Treated Primary Second Molar Teeth: An in vitro study

Fracture Resistance of Endocrowns Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Endodontically Treated Primary Second Molar Teeth: An in vitro study

Evaluation of short- and long-term bond strength of zirconia after different surface treatments

Zirconia Crowns for Primary Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About