Author:
Zheng Ziting,Sun Jieli,Jiang Lifang,Wu Yuan,He Jiahui,Ruan Wenhao,Yan Wenjuan
Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study aimed to evaluate the stress distributions in endocrown restorations as applied to endodontically treated teeth (ETT), according to the factors of “margin design” (four levels) and “restorative material” (six levels).
Methods
Four 3D-finite elements models were constructed for endocrown restored molars considering different margin designs. Model A was prepared with a flat butt joint margin and received an endocrown with a 2.0-mm occlusal thickness. Model B was prepared with a 20° bevel margin and received an endocrown with a 2.0-mm occlusal thickness. Model C was prepared with an axial reduction and 1-mm shoulder margin and received an endocrown with a 2.0-mm occlusal thickness. Model D was prepared with an anatomic margin and received an endocrown with a 2.0-mm occlusal thickness. The following endocrown materials were used: In-Ceram Zirconia (Zr), Vita Suprinity (VS), IPS Empress (IE), Grandio blocs (GR), VisCalor bulk (VS), and CopraPeek Light (CP). The Load application (600 N) was performed at the food bolus and tooth surface during the closing phase of the chewing cycle. The results for the endocrown and tooth remnants were determined according to the von Mises stress. The failure risk of the cement layer was also calculated based on the normal stress criterion.
Results
Model D (with an anatomic margin) showed the greatest stress concentrations, especially in the irregular and sharp angles of the restoration and tooth remnants. The stress concentrated on the dentin was significantly lower in Model B with a 20° bevel margin (20.86 MPa), i.e., 1.3 times lower than the other three margin designs (27.80 MPa). Restorative materials with higher elastic moduli present higher stress concentrations inside the endocrown and transmit less stress to the cement layer, resulting in lower bonding failure risks. In contrast, materials with an elastic modulus similar to that of dentin presented with a more homogeneous stress distribution on the whole structure.
Conclusions
An endocrown with a 20° bevel margin design could be a favorable preparation option for ETT. Composite resins (GR and VC) exhibit a more even stress distribution, and seem to be more promising materials for endocrown molars.
Funder
National Natural Science Foundation of China-Guangdong Joint Fund
Clinical Research Startup Program of Southern Medical University by High-level University Construction Funding of Guangdong Provincial Department of Education
Clinical Research Program of Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference42 articles.
1. Dietschi D, Duc O, Krejci I, Sadan A. Biomechanical considerations for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review of the literature, Part II (Evaluation of fatigue behavior, interfaces, and in vivo studies). Quintessence Int (Berlin, Germany: 1985). 2008;39(2):117–29.
2. Schestatsky R, Dartora G, Felberg R, Spazzin AO, Sarkis-Onofre R, Bacchi A, Pereira GKR. Do endodontic retreatment techniques influence the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019;90:306–12.
3. Phang ZY, Quek SHQ, Teoh KH, Tan KBC, Tan K. A retrospective study on the success, survival, and incidence of complications of post-retained restorations in premolars supporting fixed dental prostheses with a mean of 7 years in function. Int J Prosthodont. 2020;33(2):176–83.
4. Sedrez-Porto JA, Rosa WL, da Silva AF, Munchow EA, Pereira-Cenci T. Endocrown restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016;52:8–14.
5. Govare N, Contrepois M. Endocrowns: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(3):411-418 e419.
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献