RSS-Feed abonnieren

DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1811715
Endocrowns for Rehabilitation of Anterior Teeth: In Vitro Mechanical Analysis
Authors
Funding This study was supported by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP 2019/20801-4) with research grant and by Coordination of Superior Level Staff Improvement (CAPES) with PhD scholarship received by Dr. Alison Flávio Campos dos Santos.

Abstract
Objective
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.
Materials and Methods
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.
Statistical Analysis
Data were subjected to Kruskal–Wallis followed by Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligner test (α = 0.05).
Results
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).
Discussion
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.
Conclusion
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).
Clinical Relevance
For anterior teeth with narrow root canals or limited occlusal space, resin matrix ceramic endocrowns may be considered a viable restorative alternative to the conventional fiber post–resin core–lithium disilicate crown approach.
Publikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
22. September 2025
© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Saker S, Özcan M. Retentive strength of fiber-reinforced composite posts with composite resin cores: effect of remaining coronal structure and root canal dentin conditioning protocols. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 114 (06) 856-861
- 2 Santos Pantaleón D, Morrow BR, Cagna DR, Pameijer CH, Garcia-Godoy F. Influence of remaining coronal tooth structure on fracture resistance and failure mode of restored endodontically treated maxillary incisors. J Prosthet Dent 2018; 119 (03) 390-396
- 3 Zarow M, Ramírez-Sebastià A, Paolone G. et al. A new classification system for the restoration of root filled teeth. Int Endod J 2018; 51 (03) 318-334
- 4 Garcia PP, Wambier LM, de Geus JL, da Cunha LF, Correr GM, Gonzaga CC. Do anterior and posterior teeth treated with post-and-core restorations have similar failure rates? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2019; 121 (06) 887-894.e4
- 5 Jurema ALB, Filgueiras AT, Santos KA, Bresciani E, Caneppele TMF. Effect of intraradicular fiber post on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated and restored anterior teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2022; 128 (01) 13-24
- 6 Martins MD, Junqueira RB, de Carvalho RF, Lacerda MFLS, Faé DS, Lemos CAA. Is a fiber post better than a metal post for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2021; 112: 103750
- 7 Magne P, Lazari PC, Carvalho MA, Johnson T, Del Bel Cury AA. Ferrule-effect dominates over use of a fiber post when restoring endodontically treated incisors: an in vitro study. Oper Dent 2017; 42 (04) 396-406
- 8 Dejak B, Młotkowski A. Strength comparison of anterior teeth restored with ceramic endocrowns vs custom-made post and cores. J Prosthodont Res 2018; 62 (02) 171-176
- 9 Sarkis-Onofre R, Amaral Pinheiro H, Poletto-Neto V, Bergoli CD, Cenci MS, Pereira-Cenci T. Randomized controlled trial comparing glass fiber posts and cast metal posts. J Dent 2020; 96: 103334
- 10 Reis JMDSN, Oliveira CRM, Reis EGJ, Mascaro BA, Abi-Rached FO. One-step fiber post cementation and core build-up in endodontically treated tooth: a clinical case report. J Esthet Restor Dent 2020; 32 (01) 5-11
- 11 Hussain SK, McDonald A, Moles DR. In vitro study investigating the mass of tooth structure removed following endodontic and restorative procedures. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98 (04) 260-269
- 12 Ferrari M, Vichi A, Grandini S. Efficacy of different adhesive techniques on bonding to root canal walls: an SEM investigation. Dent Mater 2001; 17 (05) 422-429
- 13 Mannocci F, Bitter K, Sauro S, Ferrari P, Austin R, Bhuva B. Present status and future directions: the restoration of root filled teeth. Int Endod J 2022; 55 (Suppl. 04) 1059-1084
- 14 Shin Y, Park S, Park JW, Kim KM, Park YB, Roh BD. Evaluation of the marginal and internal discrepancies of CAD-CAM endocrowns with different cavity depths: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117 (01) 109-115
- 15 Stockton L, Lavelle CL, Suzuki M. Are posts mandatory for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth?. Endod Dent Traumatol 1998; 14 (02) 59-63
- 16 Bankoğlu Güngör M, Turhan Bal B, Yilmaz H, Aydin C, Karakoca Nemli S. Fracture strength of CAD/CAM fabricated lithium disilicate and resin nano ceramic restorations used for endodontically treated teeth. Dent Mater J 2017; 36 (02) 135-141
- 17 Edelhoff D, Sorensen JA. Tooth structure removal associated with various preparation designs for posterior teeth. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2002; 22 (03) 241-249
- 18 Lenz U, Bacchi A, Della Bona A. Biomechanical performance of endocrown and core-crown restorations: a systematic review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2024; 36 (02) 303-323
- 19 Gresnigt MM, Özcan M, van den Houten ML, Schipper L, Cune MS. Fracture strength, failure type and Weibull characteristics of lithium disilicate and multiphase resin composite endocrowns under axial and lateral forces. Dent Mater 2016; 32 (05) 607-614
- 20 Biacchi GR, Basting RT. Comparison of fracture strength of endocrowns and glass fiber post-retained conventional crowns. Oper Dent 2012; 37 (02) 130-136
- 21 Bindl A, Richter B, Mörmann WH. Survival of ceramic computer-aided design/manufacturing crowns bonded to preparations with reduced macroretention geometry. Int J Prosthodont 2005; 18 (03) 219-224
- 22 Otto T, Mörmann WH. Clinical performance of chairside CAD/CAM feldspathic ceramic posterior shoulder crowns and endocrowns up to 12 years. Int J Comput Dent 2015; 18 (02) 147-161
- 23 Morimoto S, Fraga RM, Tedesco TK, Özcan M, Sampaio FBWR, Raggio DP. Two-year survival of ceramic endocrowns and partial coverage ceramic restorations with fiber post: a 2-year double-blind randomized clinical trial. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2022; 30 (04) 252-261
- 24 Ash M, Nelson S. Wheeler's Dental Anatomy, Physiology and Occlusion. 8th ed.. Philadelphia: Saunders Co.; 2003: 297-314
- 25 Weitzel ISSL, Rangel JHR, Perim MP. et al. Mechanical performance of monolithic materials cemented to a dentin-like substrate. J Prosthet Dent 2020; 123: 753.e1-753.e7
- 26 Temp RW, Packaeser MG, Machry RV. et al. Characteristic fatigue strength and reliability of dental glass-ceramics: effect of distinct surface treatments - hydrofluoric acid etching and silane treatment vs one-step self-etching ceramic primer. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2024; 150: 106338
- 27 Batalha-Silva S, de Andrada MA, Maia HP, Magne P. Fatigue resistance and crack propensity of large MOD composite resin restorations: direct versus CAD/CAM inlays. Dent Mater 2013; 29 (03) 324-331
- 28 Abduo J, Sambrook RJ. Longevity of ceramic onlays: a systematic review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018; 30 (03) 193-215
- 29 Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMO, de Jager N, Bottino MA, de Kok P, Kleverlaan CJ. Full-crown versus endocrown approach: a 3D-analysis of both restorations and the effect of ferrule and restoration material. J Prosthodont 2021; 30 (04) 335-344
- 30 Ramos NdeC, Campos TM, Paz IS. et al. Microstructure characterization and SCG of newly engineered dental ceramics. Dent Mater 2016; 32 (07) 870-878
- 31 Pilecco RO, da Rosa LS, Baldi A. et al. How do different intraoral scanners and milling machines affect the fit and fatigue behavior of lithium disilicate and resin composite endocrowns?. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2024; 155: 106557
- 32 Turunç-Oğuzman R, Şişmanoğlu S. Influence of surface treatments and adhesive protocols on repair bond strength of glass-matrix and resin-matrix CAD/CAM ceramics. J Esthet Restor Dent 2023; 35 (08) 1322-1331
- 33 Aydemir S, Arukaslan G, Sarıdağ S, Kaya-Büyükbayram I, Ylıdıran Y. Comparing fracture resistance and the time required for two different fiber post removal systems. J Prosthodont 2018; 27 (08) 771-774