Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Mandibular Molars Restored With Two Endocrown Designs (An In-Vitro Study)
Ahmad Abo El Fadl, Tarek Elsewify
Abstract
Open-access reader
Ahmad Abo El Fadl, Tarek Elsewify
Abstract
Open-access reader
Aim: To evaluate the effect of two endocrown designs on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular molars.Materials and methods: Fourteen mandibular molars were endodontically treated and randomly divided into two groups according to the endocrown design; group (A) Axial extension (n=7) and group (B) Circumferential extension (n=7). Endocrown preparation was done followed by CAD/CAM endocowns design and fabrication using lithium disilicate glass ceramics. Endocrowns were cemented using a standardized protocol. All samples were subjected to fracture resistance test using a universal testing machine and the maximum loaded was recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using One-Way ANOVA and significance level was set at 0.05.Results: Endodontically treated mandibular molars with axial extension endocrowns showed significantly higher fracture resistance than those with circumferential extension. Conclusions: Axial extension endocrown design is recommended to restore endodontically treated mandibular molars.
OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Aim: To evaluate the effect of two endocrown designs on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular molars.Materials and methods: Fourteen mandibular molars were endodontically treated and randomly divided into two groups according to the endocrown design; group (A) Axial extension (n=7) and group (B) Circumferential extension (n=7). Endocrown preparation was done followed by CAD/CAM endocowns design and fabrication using lithium disilicate glass ceramics. Endocrowns were cemented using a standardized protocol. All samples were subjected to fracture resistance test using a universal testing machine and the maximum loaded was recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using One-Way ANOVA and significance level was set at 0.05.Results: Endodontically treated mandibular molars with axial extension endocrowns showed significantly higher fracture resistance than those with circumferential extension. Conclusions: Axial extension endocrown design is recommended to restore endodontically treated mandibular molars.
Key concepts: Molar, Orthodontics, Fracture (geology), Dentistry, Medicine, Materials science, Composite material