Journals / Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry / 2015 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 2

Endokronlar: Derleme

ENDOCROWNS: REVIEW

Pages
57–63
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Compared to conventional methods, good aesthetics, better mechanical performance, and less cost and clinic time are the advantages of endocrowns

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The ideal restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) has been widely and controversially discussed in the literature.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Prevention of healthy dental structure is essential to help mechanical stabilization of tooth-restoration integrity, increase the amount of suitable surfaces for adhesion and thus positively affect the long-term success.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Compared to conventional methods, good aesthetics, better mechanical performance, and less cost and clinic time are the advantages of endocrowns
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The ideal restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) has been widely and controversially discussed in the literature. Prevention of healthy dental structure is essential to help mechanical stabilization of tooth-restoration integrity, increase the amount of suitable surfaces for adhesion and thus positively affect the long-term success. ETT are affected by a higher risk of biomechanical failure than vital teeth. With the development of adhesive systems, the need for post-core restorations is also reduced. Especially for restoration of excessively damaged ETT, endocrowns have been used as an alternative to the conventional post-core and fixed partial dentures. Compared to conventional methods, good aesthetics, better mechanical performance, and less cost and clinic time are the advantages of endocrowns

Özet

Endodontik tedavili dişlerin ideal restorasyonu literatürde geniş yer tutan ve tartışmalı bir konudur. Sağlıklı diş dokusunu korumak, diş-restorasyon bütünlüğünün mekanik stabilizasyonunu sağlamaya yardımcı olması, adezyon için uygun yüzey miktarının artması ve böylece restoratif tedavinin uzun dönem başarısını olumlu yönde etkilemesi için gereklidir. Pulpanın uzaklaştırılması ile canlılığını kaybeden devital dişler, vital dişlere kıyasla daha yüksek biyomekanik başarısızlık riski taşımaktadırlar. Adeziv sistemlerin gelişmesiyle birlikte post-kor restorasyonlarına olan ihtiyaç da azalmaktadır. Özellikle aşırı madde kaybına sahip endodontik tedavili dişlerin restorasyonunda, geleneksel post-kor ve sabit bölümlü protezlere alternatif olarak endokron restorasyonlar kullanılmaya başlanmıştır. Geleneksel yöntemlere kıyasla endokronların estetik, mekanik performanslarının daha iyi olması, maliyetinin düşük olması ve kısa sürede yapılmaları avantajlarıdır

🔖

Cite This Article

CENGİZ, S., SEVİMLİ, G., ORUÇ, M. S. (2022). Endokronlar: Derleme. Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 2, 57–63. https://ajindex.com/articles/563832

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Robbins JW. Restoration of the endodontically treated tooth. Dent Clin North Am 2002;46(2):367-384.
  2. 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 2008;39(2):117-129.
  3. Morgano SM, Hashem AF, Fotoohi K, Rose L. A nationwide survey of contemporary philosophies and techniques of restoring endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72(3):259-267.
  4. Zarone F, Sorrentino R, Apicella D, Valentino B, Ferrari M, Aversa R, Apicella A. Evaluation of the biomechanical behavior of maxillary central incisors restored by means of endocrowns compared to a natural tooth: A 3d static linear finite elements analysis. Dent Mater 2006;22(11):1035-1044.
  5. Chang CY KJ, Lin YS, Chang YH. Fracture resistance and failure modes of CEREC endo- crowns and conventional post and core-supported CEREC crowns. J Dent Sci 2009;4(3):110-117.
  6. Ferrari M, Vichi A, Mannocci F, Mason PN. Retrospective study of the clinical performance of fiber posts. Am J Dent 2000;13(Spec No):9B- 13B. Assif D, Nissan J, Gafni Y, Gordon M. Assessment of the resistance to fracture of endodontically treated molars restored with amalgam. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89(5):462-465.
  7. Johnson JK, Schwartz NL, Blackwell RT. Evaluation and restoration of endodontically treated posterior teeth. J Am Dent Assoc 1976;93(3):597-605.
  8. Linn J, Messer HH. Effect of restorative procedures on the strength of endodontically treated molars. J Endod 1994;20(10):479-485.
  9. Lander E, Dietschi D. Endocrowns: A clinical report. Quintessence Int 2008;39(2):99-106.
  10. Reeh ES, Douglas WH, Messer HH. Stiffness of endodontically-treated teeth related to restoration technique. J Dent Res 1989;68(11):1540-1544.
  11. Oliveira Fde C, Denehy GE, Boyer DB. Fracture resistance of endodontically prepared teeth using various restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;115(1):57-60.
  12. Reeh ES, Messer HH, Douglas WH. Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of endodontic and restorative procedures. J Endod 1989;15(11):512- 516. Faria AC, Rodrigues RC, de Almeida Antunes RP, de Mattos Mda G, Ribeiro RF. Endodontically treated teeth: Characteristics and considerations to restore them. J Prosthodont Res 2011;55(2):69- 74. Papa J, Cain C, Messer HH. Moisture content of vital vs endodontically treated teeth. Endod Dent Traumatol 1994;10(2):91-93.
  13. Trope M, Ray HL, Jr. Resista