Marginal adaptation and fracture strength of endocrowns manufactured with different restorative materials: SEM and mechanical evaluation

Abstract

Endocrowns were manufactured using different restorative materials to evaluate the marginal adaptation and fracture strength. Fifty endodontically treated mandibular first molar teeth were divided into five groups (n = 10). Endocrowns were obtained from lithium disilicate glass ceramic ingots by heat‐press technique (Group e.max Press: GEP), and from feldspathic blocks (Group Cerec: GC), polymer infiltrated ceramic network blocks (Group Enamic: GE), lithium disilicate glass ceramic blocks (Group e.max CAD: GEC), and zirconia‐reinforced glass ceramic blocks (Group Suprinity: GS) by CAD/CAM technique. After thermocycling, marginal adaptation was evaluated under scanning electron microscope at ×200 magnification. The specimens' fracture strengths were tested in universal test machine, and fracture types were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed with Kruskal–Wallis test. The highest marginal gap value was found in GEP, but no significant differences were determined among the other four groups (p > .05). Significant differences were observed among the groups in terms of fracture strength (p = .019). The fracture strength values of GEC were significantly higher than GE, GC, and GS (p < .05). Values were not significantly different between the GEC and GEP groups (p > .05). CAD/CAM endocrowns showed better marginal adaptation than heat‐pressed endocrowns. Clinically acceptable marginal gaps were seen in both endocrown types. Both CAD/CAM and heat‐pressed lithium disilicate glass ceramic endocrowns showed higher fracture strength.

Influence of margin design and restorative material on the stress distribution of endocrowns: a 3D finite element analysis

“…Given this, alternative materials with a more compliant behavior have been introduced for endocrown fabrication, such as resin composites and polymer-infiltrated ceramics. They exhibit higher resilience and more resistance to higher occlusal forces [ 20 , 21 ]. Recently, a modified polyetheretherketone (PEEK) material, with favorable biocompatibility and good adhesion properties to tooth structures, also become a viable option for endocrowns [ 22 ].…”

Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of lithium disilicate and zirconia all-ceramic CAD-CAM crowns using digital impressions: A systematic review

“…1,3-5,11-56 Of those, 45 were selected based on title, abstracts, and full-text analysis. 1,[3][4][5][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][52][53][54] Of the 45 full-text studies, 27 were excluded based on abstract evaluation, 4,5,11,13,15,16,18,19,21,23,26,28,30,33,[38][39][40][41][43][44][45][46]48,49,[52][53][54] and 18 were completely reviewed. 1,3,12,14,17,20,22,24,…”

“…An electronic search was conducted on Medline/Pubmed and identified 50 relevant studies. 1,3-5,11-56 Of those, 45 were selected based on title, abstracts, and full-text analysis. 1,3-5,11…”

“…1,3-5,11-35,37-49,52-54 Of the 45 full-text studies, 27 were excluded based on abstract evaluation, 4,5,11,13,15,16,18,19,21,23,26,28,30,33,38-41,43-46,48,49,52-…”

Review of Marginal Adaptation and Fracture Resistance of Computer Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacturer (CAD‐CAM) Fabricated Endo-crowns

“…Only four papers focused on the differences between a classical full crown and endocrown. [19][20][21]. Also there is other study shown the marginal adaptation of CAD/CAM endocrown had superior marginal seating than a classical full crowns [22].…”