Author:
Tarrosh Mohammed Y,Moaleem Mohammed M Al,Mughals Aalaa Ibrahim,Houmady Raghad,Zain Asma A.,Moafa Alkhansa,Darraj Maram A.,Najmi Loay Ebrahim,Bajawi Hashim A,Mohammed Shaima Abdoh,Karobari Mohmed Isaqali
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
The objective of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effects of different preparation designs on the mean colour change (ΔE*), marginal adaptation, fracture resistance, and fracture types of maxillary and mandibular premolar endocrowns (ECs).
Methodology
A total of 40 extracted maxillary and mandibular premolars were treated endodontically, and each type was subdivided according to the remaining axial height (remaining walls on all surfaces; 2–4 mm) and 2 mm inside the pulp chamber. Specimens were immersed in coffee for 14 days, ΔE* was determined, marginal adaptation was observed, fracture forces test was conducted, and the samples were examined visually at 10× magnification to evaluate failure type and identify fracture origin. The data were entered and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences, and significance between and within groups was evaluated through ANOVA. The p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
The ΔE* values of the maxillary premolar with 2 mm axial height were the highest (6.8 ± 0.89 units), whereas the lowest value was observed in the mandibular premolar with 4 mm axial height (2.9 ± 0.53 units). Significant differences (p < 0.05) in teeth and design were observed. The marginal adaptation of the mandibular premolar with 4 mm axial height was the highest (30.20 ± 1.53 μm), whereas the lowest marginal adaptation was observed in the maxillary premolar with 2 mm axial height (14.38 ± 0.99 μm), and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The maximum fracture force was observed in maxillary premolars with 2 mm axial height (2248.15 ± 134.74 N), and no statistically significant difference (p = 0.07) was observed between maxillary and mandibular premolars at 4 mm axial height.
Conclusion
The recorded ΔE* values of the ECs were within clinically acceptable values or slightly higher, and the marginal adaption values were within acceptable and recommended clinical values in µm. EC preparation with 2 mm axial height in both arches recorded the highest fracture forces. Type III (split fracture) failure was recorded as the highest in the maxillary and mandibular premolar ECs with different axial wall heights.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference46 articles.
1. Pissis P. Fabrication of a metal-free ceramic restoration utilizing the monobloc technique. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent. 1995;7(5):83–94. PMID: 7548896.
2. Fages M, Bennasar B. The endocrown: a different type of all-ceramic reconstruction for molars. J Can Dent Assoc. 2013;79:d140. PMID: 24309044.
3. Papalexopoulos D, Samartzi TK, Sarafianou A. A thorough analysis of the Endocrown Restoration: A literature review. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021;22(4):422–6. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3075.
4. Soliman M, Alzahrani G, Alabdualataif F, Eldwakhly E, Alsamady S, Aldegheishem A, Abdelhafeez MM. Impact of ceramic material and Preparation Design on marginal fit of Endocrown restorations. Mater (Basel). 2022;15(16):5592. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15165592.
5. Taha D, Spintzyk S, Sabet A, Wahsh M, Salah T. Assessment of marginal adaptation and fracture resistance of endocrown restorations utilizing different machinable blocks subjected to thermomechanical aging. J Esthet Restor Dent off Publ Am Acad Esthet Dent. 2018;30:319–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12396.