Qamar Zeeshan, Alghamdi Ahmed Mohammed Saad, Haydarah Naji Khaled Bin, Balateef Abdulateef Ahmed, Alamoudi Ahmed Aydhah, Abumismar Munther Amer, Mathur Ankita, Minervini Giuseppe
Department of O&MFS and Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Riyadh Elm University, Riyadh 13244, Saudi Arabia.
Al-Iman General Hospital, Riyadh 12684, Saudi Arabia.
J Funct Biomater. 2023 May 14;14(5):276. doi: 10.3390/jfb14050276.
The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the results of the studies that have compared the physical and mechanical properties of lithium disilicate (LDS) endocrowns constructed for posterior teeth to those retained by post-and-core retention systems. The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The electronic search process was conducted on PubMed-Medline, Scopus, Embase and ISI Web of Knowledge (WoS) from the earliest available date till 31 January 2023. Additionally, the studies were assessed for their overall quality and risk of bias using the Quality Assessment Tool For In Vitro Studies (the QUIN). The initial search resulted in 291 articles, out of which, only 10 studies met the eligibility criteria. In all studies LDS endocrowns were compared with various kinds of endodontic posts and crowns made from other materials. There were no definite pattern or trends observed in the fracture strengths of tested specimens. There was no predilection observed in failure patters among the experimental specimens. No predilection was observed in the fracture strengths of LDS endocrowns when compared to post-and-core crowns. Furthermore, no differences in failure patterns could be observed when both types of restorations were compared. The authors propose standardized testing of endocrowns against post-and-core crowns in future studies. In conclusion, long-term clinical trials are advocated to compare the survival, failure and complication rates of LDS endocrowns and post-and-core restorations.
本系统评价的目的是总结那些比较为后牙制作的二硅酸锂（LDS）内冠与采用桩核固位系统固位的内冠的物理和机械性能的研究结果。该评价遵循PRISMA指南进行。电子检索过程在PubMed - Medline、Scopus、Embase和ISI Web of Knowledge（WoS）上进行，检索时间从最早可用日期至2023年1月31日。此外，使用体外研究质量评估工具（QUIN）对这些研究的整体质量和偏倚风险进行评估。初步检索得到291篇文章，其中只有10项研究符合纳入标准。在所有研究中，LDS内冠与各种由其他材料制成的牙髓桩和牙冠进行了比较。在测试样本的断裂强度方面未观察到明确的模式或趋势。在实验样本的失效模式中未观察到偏好。与桩核冠相比，LDS内冠的断裂强度未观察到偏好。此外，比较两种修复体时，在失效模式上未观察到差异。作者建议在未来的研究中对LDS内冠与桩核冠进行标准化测试。总之，提倡进行长期临床试验以比较LDS内冠和桩核修复体的生存率、失败率和并发症发生率。
