Abstract:INTRODUCTION: Endocrown restorations have increased in popularity in recent years due to the advancement of both adhesive and restorative materials. The clinical success of endocrowns depends on several factors, including preparation design, material selection, fracture resistance, and marginal adaptation. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the fracture strength of endocrown restorations fabricated from three different computer-aided design (CAD)/computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) materials.METHODS: Thirty extracted mandibular first molars were selected. The teeth underwent conventional root canal treatment before being prepared for endocrown restoration. The teeth were allocated to three groups (n=10), corresponding to each of the three ceramic materials used to fabricate the endocrowns they would receive. The ceramic materials used were zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic (VITA Suprinity, VITA Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany), polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic (VITA Enamic, VITA Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany), and lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein). The specimens were scanned, and the digital impressions were transferred into design software to construct the endocrowns. The endocrowns were then milled and cemented. A universal testing machine (5969L3504, Instron, USA) was used for the fracture strength test at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until catastrophic failure occurred. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM Corp. Released 2015. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.RESULTS: The one-way analysis of the variance test indicated a significant difference in the fracture strength between the different ceramic groups tested (P=0.037). The Tukey posthoc test showed that the IPS e.max CAD group had marginally higher fracture strength values than the VITA Enamic group (P=055). No significant differences in fracture strength values were found between the VITA Enamic and VITA Suprinity groups or between the VITA Suprinity and IPS e.max CAD groups (P>0.05).CONCLUSION: The reported fracture strength values for all the tested materials were higher than the strength required to resist masticatory forces. Therefore, endocrowns fabricated using VITA Enamic, IPS e.max CAD, and VITA Suprinity CAD/CAM materials present restorations with a clinically acceptable fracture strength.

In-vitro comparison of fracture resistance of CAD/CAM porcelain restorations for endodontically treated molars

[Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Restored with Different CAD/CAM All-Ceramic Restorations].

Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Premolars Restored with Lithium Disilicate CAD/CAM Crowns or Onlays and Luted with Two Luting Agents.

Fracture resistance of CAD/CAM tooth-colored versus cast metal post-and-core restorations in root filled teeth: An in vitro study

Fracture resistance of CAD/CAM endocrowns made from different materials in maxillary premolar interproximal defects

[Fracture Resistance of Teeth Restored with One-Piece Computer Aided Design and Manufacture Zirconia Posts and Cores: an in Vitro Study].

Effect of material types on the fracture resistance of maxillary central incisors restored with CAD/CAM post and cores

Fracture Strength of Endocrowns Fabricated From Three Different Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Ceramic Materials: An In-Vitro Study

Fracture resistance of root canal-treated molars restored with ceramic overlays with/without different resin composite base materials: an in vitro study

[An Experimental Study on Fracture Resistance of Metal-Ceramic Crowned Incisors with Different Post-Core Systems].

Influence of various fabrication techniques and porcelain firing on the accuracy of metal-ceramic crowns

Comparative Study of the Influence of Heat Treatment on Fracture Resistance of Different Ceramic Materials Used for CAD/CAM Systems

The effect of two preparation designs on the fracture resistance and marginal adaptation of two types of ceramic crowns using CAD/CAM technology (In vitro study)

In Vitro Analysis of Outcome Differences Between Repairing and Replacing Broken Dental Restorations

Post-Fatigue Fracture and Marginal Behavior of Endodontically Treated Teeth: Partial Crown vs. Full Crown vs. Endocrown vs. Fiber-Reinforced Resin Composite

Assessment of marginal adaptation and fracture resistance of endocrown restorations utilizing different machinable blocks subjected to thermomechanical aging

The effect of restorative material selection and cementation procedures on the durability of endocrowns in the anterior teeth: an in-vitro study

In vitro performance and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM-fabricated implant supported molar crowns

Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolar Teeth Restored with Wallpapering Technique: A Comparative In Vitro Study

Influence of Direct Coronal Restoration Materials on the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Premolars: An In Vitro Study

Effect of fiber-reinforced direct restorative materials on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular molars restored with a conservative endodontic cavity design