Effects of a modified margin design, material, and loading type on the stress distribution of endocrowns: A 3D finite element analysis
Source abstract
Abstract
In this innovative study, the ferrule design for endocrowns was compared with a new preparation design with tetra-corner retention grooves at each corner of the access cavity, and the 3D finite element method was used for analysis. Resin nanoceramic (RNC), lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDS), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), and polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) materials were investigated. The new design significantly reduced the stress for LDS and PICN in axial and oblique loadings. On remaining tooth tissues, the tetra-corner retention groove design increased the stress peak for RNC and PEEK compared to the ferrule, while it decreased the stress for LDS and PICN under both forces. It was concluded that the new, modified preparation design could be used as an alternative design to the ferrule.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Laser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Antalya Bilim University, BilimDent Oral and Dental Health Center (ADSUAM)
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Antalya Bilim University, BilimDent Oral and Dental Health Center (ADSUAM)
Private practice, Özdemir Dental Center
References (25)
Show source-provided references
1. 1) Haralur SB, Alamrey AA, Alshehri SA, Alzahrani DS, Alfarsi M. Effect of different preparation designs and all ceramic materials on fracture strength of molar endocrowns. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2020; 18: 2280800020947329.10.1177/2280800020947329 ↗
2. 2) Wicaksono S, Prasetia W, Muryani A, Dirgantara T, Mahyuddin AI. Finite element stress analysis of dental cement application on endocrown and onlay restoration. Aust Endod J 2023; 49: 665-674.10.1111/aej.12800 ↗
3. 3) Zeng B, Luo B, Hu J, Meng D, Zhang J, Cao X, et al. Effect of margin designs and loading conditions on the stress distribution of endocrowns: A finite element analysis. BMC Oral Health 2024; 24: 657.10.1186/s12903-024-04422-3 ↗
4. 4) Ghoul W El, Özcan M, Tribst JPM, Salameh Z. Fracture resistance, failure mode and stress concentration in a modified endocrown design. Biomater Investig Dent 2020; 7: 110-119.10.1080/26415275.2020.1801348 ↗
5. 5) 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 4): 1059-1084.10.1111/iej.13796 ↗
6. 6) El-Ma'aita A, A Al-Rabab'ah M, Abu-Awwad M, Hattar S, Devlin H. Endocrowns clinical performance and patient satisfaction: A randomized clinical trial of three monolithic ceramic restorations. J Prosthodont 2022; 31: 30-37.10.1111/jopr.13414 ↗
7. 7) Zhu J, Li S, Wang D, Li D, Wang X, Rong Q. Effect of remaining pericervical dentin on biomechanical behavior of endocrown-restored molars with different materials: Three-dimensional finite element and Weibull analyses. Dent Mater J 2023; 42: 683-691.10.4012/dmj.2023-015 ↗
8. 8) Ural Ç, Çağlayan E. A 3-dimensional finite element and in vitro analysis of endocrown restorations fabricated with different preparation designs and various restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2021; 126: 586.e1-586.e9.10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.05.018 ↗
9. 9) Einhorn M, DuVall N, Wajdowicz M, Brewster J, Roberts H. Preparation ferrule design effect on endocrown failure resistance. J Prosthodont 2019; 28: e237-e242.10.1111/jopr.12671 ↗
10. 10) Beji Vijayakumar J, Varadan P, Balaji L, Rajan M, Kalaiselvam R, Saeralaathan S, et al. Fracture resistance of resin based and lithium disilicate endocrowns. Which is better? —A systematic review of in-vitro studies. Biomater Investig Dent 2021; 8: 104-111.10.1080/26415275.2021.1932510 ↗
11. 11) 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: 607-614.10.1016/j.dental.2016.01.004 ↗
12. 12) Aher SV, Fulari D, Adaki R, Huddar D, Dhole R, Badadare M, et al. A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of tooth restoration complex restored with PEEK and lithium disilicate endocrowns. J Prosthodont 2024; 33: 670-676.10.1111/jopr.13754 ↗
13. 13) El-Farag SAA, Elerian FA, Elsherbiny AA, Abbas MH. 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 2023; 23: 421.10.1186/s12903-023-03114-8 ↗
14. 14) Aparna J, Maiti S, Jessy P. Polyether ether ketone—As an alternative biomaterial for Metal Richmond crown-3-dimensional finite element analysis. J Conserv Dent 2021; 24: 553-557.10.4103/jcd.jcd_638_20 ↗
15. 15) Abtahi S, Alikhasi M, Siadat H. Biomechanical behavior of endocrown restorations with different cavity design and CAD-CAM materials under a static and vertical load: A finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2022; 127: 600.e1-600.e8.10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.027 ↗
16. 16) Zheng Z, Sun J, Jiang L, Wu Y, He J, Ruan W, et al. Influence of margin design and restorative material on the stress distribution of endocrowns: A 3D finite element analysis. BMC Oral Health 2022; 22: 30.10.1186/s12903-022-02063-y ↗
17. 17) 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: 335-344.10.1111/jopr.13244 ↗
18. 18) Huang Y, Fokkinga WA, Zhang Q, Creugers NHJ, Jiang Q. Biomechanical properties of different endocrown designs on endodontically treated teeth. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2023; 140: 105691.10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.105691 ↗
19. 19) Ordinola-Zapata R, Lin F, Nagarkar S, Perdigão J. A critical analysis of research methods and experimental models to study the load capacity and clinical behaviour of the root filled teeth. Int Endod J 2022; 55(Suppl 2): 471-494.10.1111/iej.13722 ↗
20. 20) Gong Q, Huang L, Luo J, Zhang Y, Meng Q, Quan J, et al. The practicability of different preparation of mandibular molar restored by modified endocrown with intracanal extension: Computational analysis using finite element models. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2022; 226: 107178.10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.107178 ↗
21. 21) Yang J, Han F, Chen C, Xie H. Comparison of stress distribution between zirconia/alloy endocrown and CAD/CAM multi-piece zirconia post-crown: Three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Oral Investig 2022 ; 26: 5007-5017.10.1007/s00784-022-04470-5 ↗
22. 22) Lan TH, Fok ASL, Hung CC, Du JK, Liu C Te, Chen JH. Stress analysis and risk of failure during clenching in ceramic assembly models: 3-dimensional finite element analysis. J Dent Sci 2023; 18: 791-800.10.1016/j.jds.2023.01.015 ↗
23. 23) AboElhassan RG, Watts DC, Alamoush RA, Elraggal A. Biomechanical behavior and Weibull survival of CAD-CAM endocrowns with different marginal designs: A 3D finite element analysis. Dent Mater 2024; 40: 227-235.10.1016/j.dental.2023.11.012 ↗
24. 24) He J, Zheng Z, Wu M, Zheng C, Zeng Y, Yan W. Influence of restorative material and cement on the stress distribution of endocrowns: 3D finite element analysis. BMC Oral Health 2021; 21: 495.10.1186/s12903-021-01865-w ↗
25. 25) Darwich MA, Aljareh A, Alhouri N, Szávai S, Nazha HM, Duvigneau F, et al. Biomechanical assessment of endodontically treated molars restored by endocrowns made from different CAD/CAM materials. Materials (Basel) 2023; 16: 764.10.3390/ma16020764 ↗