Fracture Strength of CAD/CAM Endocrown and Post-Core Restorations with Fiber Strip Reinforcement in Mandibular Premolars
Source abstract
Abstract
This study evaluated the effects of restorative material, restoration type, and fiber strip reinforcement on the fracture strength (FS) of endocrown (EC) and post-core (PC) restorations in endodontically treated premolars. Specimens were allocated according to restorative material [resin-nanoceramic (RNC) or feldspathic ceramic (FC)], restoration type (EC or PC), and reinforcement [fiber strip-reinforced (FR) or -non-reinforced (NF)]. FS was determined using a universal testing machine under axial loading. Statistical analysis was performed using three-way ANOVA and Bonferroni tests (α = 0.05). Material, restoration type, and reinforcement significantly affected FS (p < 0.05). RNC restorations exhibited higher FS than FC restorations (861 ± 181 N vs. 715 ± 212 N; p < 0.001). EC restorations exhibited higher FS than PC restorations (828 ± 173 N vs. 748 ± 236 N; p = 0.046). FR groups exhibited higher FS than NF groups (848 ± 180 N vs. 728 ± 222 N; p = 0.003). The highest FS was observed in the RNC–PC–FR group (965 ± 144 N), whereas the lowest occurred in the FC–PC–NF group (480 ± 177 N). Although EC restorations showed higher FS than PC restorations, the effect of restoration type depended on material and reinforcement.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments · Dental Health and Care Utilization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Antalya Bilim University, 07190 Antalya, Turkey
BilimDent Oral and Dental Health Center, Antalya Bilim University, 07190 Antalya, Turkey
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Antalya Bilim University, 07190 Antalya, Turkey
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, 06560 Ankara, Turkey
References (82)
Show source-provided references
1. Crown and post-free adhesive restorations for endodontically treated posterior teeth: From direct composite to endocrowns
2. Effect of post space preparation drills on the incidence of root dentin defects10.5395/rde.2020.45.e53 ↗
3. Induction of dentinal microcracks during postspace preparation: A comparative microcomputed tomography study10.4103/JCD.JCD_227_18 ↗
4. Clinical evaluation of adhesively placed Cerec endo-crowns after 2 years—Preliminary results
5. Evaluation of the clinical performance of endocrown and overlay restorations: A 4-year retrospective study10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105874 ↗
6. Endocrown restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1016/j.jdent.2016.07.005 ↗
7. Survival and success of endocrowns: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.01.011 ↗
8. Atmeh, A.R., Masaud, F., AlMuhaish, L., Alanazi, A., Almutiri, H., Ali, S., Almoqhawi, H., and Khan, A.S. (2025). Comparison of commercial and experimental fibre-reinforced composites in restoring endodontically treated teeth with minimal coronal dentine: An in vitro study. J. Funct. Biomater., 16.10.3390/jfb16090335 ↗
9. Biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated premolars using different preparation designs and CAD/CAM materials10.1016/j.jdent.2017.02.007 ↗
10. Fracture resistance of resin based and lithium disilicate endocrowns. Which is better?—A systematic review of in vitro studies
11. Comparison of the 3D triple-scan protocol and the impression replica technique for 3-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses
12. Comparison of resistance to fracture between three types of permanent restorations subjected to shear force: An in vitro study10.4103/jips.jips_24_17 ↗
13. Effect of elastic gradients on the fracture resistance of tri-layer restorative systems10.1016/j.dental.2024.08.004 ↗
14. Cheng, X., Zhang, X.Y., and Qian, W.H. (2022). Influence of different base materials and thicknesses on the fracture resistance of endocrown: A three-dimensional finite element analysis. BMC Oral Health, 22.10.1186/s12903-022-02350-8 ↗
15. Tribst, J.P.M., Lo Giudice, R., Dos Santos, A.F.C., Borges, A.L.S., Silva-Concílio, L.R., Amaral, M., and Lo Giudice, G. (2021). Lithium disilicate ceramic endocrown biomechanical response according to different pulp chamber extension angles and filling materials. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14051307 ↗
16. Tribological, mechanical, and thermal properties of nano tricalcium phosphate and silver particulates reinforced Bis-GMA/TEGDMA dental resin composites10.1016/j.triboint.2024.110010 ↗
17. CAD-CAM resin-ceramic material wear: A systematic review10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.01.027 ↗
18. Survival and complication rates of feldspathic, leucite-reinforced, lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramic laminate veneers: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1111/jerd.13351 ↗
19. Post-fatigue fracture load, stress concentration and mechanical properties of feldspathic, leucite- and lithium disilicate-reinforced glass ceramics10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17787 ↗
20. Influence of elastic modulus mismatch between dentin and post-and-core on sequential bonding failure10.1016/j.jpor.2018.12.003 ↗
21. Resin composite materials for chairside CAD/CAM restorations: A comparison of selected mechanical properties10.1155/2021/8828954 ↗
22. Post-fatigue fracture resistance of premolar teeth restored with endocrowns: An in vitro investigation10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103426 ↗
23. Uzun, İ., Timur, A.H., and Şenel, K. (2024). In-vitro comparison of fracture resistance of CAD/CAM porcelain restorations for endodontically treated molars. BMC Oral Health, 24.10.1186/s12903-024-04983-3 ↗
24. Yılmaz, K., Aydın, H., Gönüldaş, F., Kara, S., Çiloğlu, Ö., Özdemir, E., and Bilen, Z. (2025). Effect of pulpal base, restorative material, and preparation type on marginal and internal fit and fracture strength of endocrowns. Materials, 18.10.20944/preprints202504.0315.v1 ↗
25. The fracture resistance of a CAD/CAM resin nano ceramic (RNC) and a CAD ceramic at different thicknesses10.1016/j.dental.2014.05.018 ↗
26. Alnajjar, F.A., Alloughani, A.J., Alhajj, M.N., and Baig, M.R. (2024). Fracture resistance of posterior milled nanoceramic crowns after thermomechanical aging. J. Funct. Biomater., 15.10.3390/jfb15070171 ↗
27. Yılmaz, K., Odabaş Hajiyev, T., Özcan Altınsoy, G., and Özarslan, M.M. (2025). Effects of apple vinegar, mouthwashes, and bleaching on color stability and surface properties of fiber-reinforced and non-reinforced restorative materials. Polymers, 17.10.20944/preprints202509.0248.v1 ↗
28. Fracture resistance of resin endocrowns with and without fiber reinforced composite base material: A preliminary study
29. Toughened and self-healing carbon nanotube/epoxy resin composites modified with polycaprolactone filler for coatings, adhesives and FRP10.1016/j.jobe.2025.113207 ↗
30. GC Corporation (2026, May 08). everStick®NET: Instructions for Use. Available online: https://www.gc.dental/india/sites/india.gc.dental/files/products/downloads/everstickfamily/ifu/ifu-everstick-net.pdf.
31. GC Corporation (2026, May 08). G-ænial® Universal Injectable Technical Manual. Available online: https://www.gc.dental/europe/sites/europe.gc.dental/files/documents/2025-07/G-aenial%20Universal%20Injectable%20Technical%20Manual.pdf.
32. Biomechanical influence of residual lateral wall thickness and resin reinforcement on the performance of endocrowns in premolars10.1016/j.dental.2025.08.008 ↗
33. Endocrown: An alternative approach for restoring endodontically treated molars with large coronal destruction
34. Kontakou Zoniou, A., Tzimas, K., Pappa, E., and Rahiotis, C. (2025). Clinical performance of endocrowns in molars: A scoping review. Medicina, 61.10.20944/preprints202507.2435.v1 ↗
35. Removal resistance of glass-fiber and metallic cast posts with different lengths10.2334/josnusd.48.15 ↗
36. (2026, May 08). CEREC Blocs C/C PC: Processing Instructions for Fine-Structured Feldspathic Ceramic Blocks for CEREC and inLab. Available online: https://www.dentsplysirona.com/content/dam/master/product-procedure-brand-categories/cerec/product-categories/consumables/restorations/silicate-ceramics/ifu/archived/CER-IFU-CEREC-Blocs-C-C-PC-EN-6526375-2015-01-14.pdf.
37. Odontometric analysis of permanent mandibular first and second premolars in an Indian population using cone beam computed tomography10.7717/peerj.20039 ↗
38. GC Corporation (2026, May 08). CERASMART270: Instructions for Use. Available online: https://www.gc.dental/europe/sites/europe.gc.dental/files/products/downloads/cerasmart270/ifu/23451_IFU_CERASMART270_E_N60892DK.pdf.
39. Evaluation of vertical discrepancies in crown seating using different glass ionomer cement volume: An in vitro study
40. (2015). Dentistry—Testing of Adhesion to Tooth Structure (Standard No. ISO/TS 11405:2015).
41. A numerical, theoretical and experimental study of the effect of thermocycling on the matrix-filler interface of dental restorative materials10.1016/j.dental.2021.01.010 ↗
42. Fracture resistance and failure modes of endocrowns manufactured with different CAD/CAM materials under axial and lateral loading10.1111/jerd.12486 ↗
43. Fracture resistance, failure mode and stress concentration in a modified endocrown design
44. Correlation of clinical performance with “in vitro tests” of restorative dental materials that use polymer-based matrices10.1016/j.dental.2011.08.594 ↗
45. Moga, R.A., Olteanu, C.D., and Delean, A.G. (2025). The influence of periodontal breakdown over the amount of orthodontic force reaching the dental pulp and NVB during orthodontic movements—A biomechanical finite element analysis. J. Clin. Med., 14.10.3390/jcm14062094 ↗
46. A comparison of the fracture resistances of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and glass fiber post-core retained conventional crowns10.4047/jap.2016.8.6.489 ↗
47. Comparative evaluation of the effect of different crown ferrule designs on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with fiber posts, composite cores, and crowns: An ex-vivo study10.4103/0972-0707.181945 ↗
48. Restoration of severely damaged endodontically treated premolars: The influence of the endo-core length on marginal integrity and fatigue resistance of lithium disilicate CAD-CAM ceramic endocrowns10.1016/j.jdent.2017.10.011 ↗
49. Fracture resistance of tilted premolars restored with different post-core systems10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_382_17 ↗
50. Comparative evaluation of incorporation of ferrule in premolars endocrown designs to check any alterations in their fracture resistance: A pilot study10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_277_24 ↗
51. Fracture resistance of maxillary premolars restored with different endocrown designs and materials after artificial ageing10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_20_00082 ↗
52. Rehabilitation of severely-destructed endodontically treated premolar teeth with novel endocrown system: Biomechanical behavior assessment through 3D finite element and in vitro analyses10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.105031 ↗
53. Effect of novel restoration techniques on the fracture resistance of teeth treated endodontically: An in vitro study10.4012/dmj.2014-326 ↗
54. Comparison of fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary first premolar with mesio-occlusal-distal access restored with composite resin, fiber post, and prefabricated metal posts restored with/without full-coverage metal crowns10.4103/jcd.jcd_416_21 ↗
55. Influence of clenching intensity on bite force balance, occlusal contact area, and average bite pressure10.1177/00220345990780070801 ↗
56. A novel approach to bite force measurements in a porcine model in vivo10.1016/j.ijom.2006.01.023 ↗
57. El-Farag, S.A.A., Elerian, F.A., Elsherbiny, A.A., and Abbas, M.H. (2023). Impact of different CAD/CAM materials on internal and marginal adaptations and fracture resistance of endocrown restorations with: 3D finite element analysis. BMC Oral Health, 23.10.1186/s12903-023-03114-8 ↗
58. GC Corporation (2026, May 08). CERASMART 270: Brochure. Available online: https://www.gc.dental/america/sites/america.gc.dental/files/products/downloads/cerasmart270/brochure/cerasmart-270-brochure.pdf.
59. The mechanical properties of human dentin: A critical review and re-evaluation of the dental literature10.1177/154411130301400103 ↗
60. Fracture toughness, flexural strength, and flexural modulus of new CAD/CAM resin composite blocks10.1111/jopr.13123 ↗
61. From artisanal to CAD-CAM blocks: State of the art of indirect composites10.1177/0022034516634286 ↗
62. A new classification system for all-ceramic and ceramic-like restorative materials10.11607/ijp.4244 ↗
63. Biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated premolars restored with different endocrown designs: Finite element study10.1016/j.jmbbm.2022.105309 ↗
64. Remaining tooth structure and prognosis of restored endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review
65. Effect of endocrown pulp chamber extension depth on molar fracture resistance10.2341/16-097-L ↗
66. Influence of restoration height and masticatory load orientation on ceramic endocrowns10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2380 ↗
67. The impact of restorative material and ceramic thickness on CAD/CAM endocrowns
68. Effect of different ferrule length on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth: An in vitro study
69. Fiber-reinforced composites in dentistry—An insight into adhesion aspects of the material and the restored tooth construct10.1016/j.dental.2022.12.003 ↗
70. High-aspect ratio fillers: Fiber-reinforced composites and their anisotropic properties10.1016/j.dental.2014.07.009 ↗
71. Exploring the influence of placing bi-directional E-glass fibers as protective layer under a CAD-CAM resin composite on the fracture pattern10.1016/j.dental.2023.09.003 ↗
72. Ferrule-effect dominates over use of a fiber post when restoring endodontically treated incisors: An in vitro study10.2341/16-243-L ↗
73. Stress analysis on mesiolingual cavity of endodontically treated molar restored using bidirectional fiber-reinforced composite (wallpapering technique)10.2147/CCIDE.S450325 ↗
74. Effects of a modified margin design, material, and loading type on the stress distribution of endocrowns: A 3D finite element analysis10.4012/dmj.2024-316 ↗
75. Effect of elasticity on stress distribution in CAD/CAM dental crowns: Glass ceramic vs. polymer-matrix composite10.1016/j.jdent.2015.01.008 ↗
76. Influence of ceramic material, thickness of restoration and cement layer on stress distribution of occlusal veneers10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0118 ↗
77. Effect of ferrule and post placement on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth after fatigue loading10.1016/j.jdent.2012.10.004 ↗
78. Kharouf, N., Pedullà, E., Plotino, G., Jmal, H., Alloui, M.E., Simonis, P., Laquerriere, P., Macaluso, V., Abdellatif, D., and Richert, R. (2023). Stronger than ever: Multifilament fiberglass posts boost maxillary premolar fracture resistance. J. Clin. Med., 12.10.3390/jcm12082975 ↗
79. Amin, A.Y., Hamdy, A., Wahsh, M., Etreby, A.E., and Emam, M. (2026). Fracture strength and failure patterns of different restoration approaches in endodontically treated maxillary premolars: An in vitro study with fractographic analysis. BMC Oral Health, 26.10.1186/s12903-026-08064-5 ↗
80. Fracture strength of endocrown maxillary restorations using different preparation designs and materials10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.106184 ↗
81. Mechanical properties and degree of conversion of resin-based core build-up materials and short fiber-reinforced flowable resin-based composite10.4012/dmj.2023-207 ↗
82. Degree of conversion and cross-link density within a resin-matrix composite10.1002/jbm.b.33960 ↗