In vitro analysis compares fracture load of endocrowns and conventional post-core systems in teeth, suggesting resin's advantage.
This article evaluates the fracture load after mechanical cycling of severely damaged endodontically treated teeth restored with: (1) fiber post, composite resin core, and lithium disilicate (LD) crown; (2) individually fabricated LD post-core and LD crown; (3) LD endocrown; or (4) resin matrix ceramic endocrown.Sixty bovine roots were endodontically treated and prepared for intraradicular retention at depths of 10 or 5 mm. Fiber posts or individually fabricated LD post-cores were cemented into 10-mm-deep prepared root canals. LD crowns were manufactured and cemented onto the cores. Endocrowns (LD or resin matrix ceramic) were fabricated and cemented into 5-mm-deep prepared roots. All samples (n = 15) were subjected to mechanical cycling (1 × 106 cycles at 100 N and 4 Hz), followed by fracture load testing and failure mode analysis.Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis followed by Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligner test (α = 0.05).The LD post-core group exhibited seven failures regarding endodontic retention during mechanical cycling and showed the lowest fracture load (192.9 N; p = 0.021). The highest fracture load was observed in the resin matrix ceramic endocrown group (713.9 N), with three catastrophic failures (root fracture). The fiber post-resin core-crown group presented the lowest number of failures during fatigue test (13%) and the lowest number of catastrophic failures (13% root fracture).The improved bonding potential of resin matrix ceramic endocrowns may contribute to higher fracture resistance and enhanced survival under mechanical fatigue compared to LD post-core systems.Resin matrix ceramic endocrowns are an option for restoring anterior severely damaged endodontically treated teeth, with the highest load to failure. However, the conventional post-core-crown strategy demonstrated lower number of failures during fatigue and lowest number of catastrophic failures (root fracture).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Santos et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: