Ciobanu Paul, Manziuc Manuela-Maria, Buduru Smaranda Dana, Dudea Diana
Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Department of Prosthodontics, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Med Pharm Rep. 2023 Oct;96(4):358-367. doi: 10.15386/mpr-2581. Epub 2023 Oct 26.
The opportunity of using Endocrown-type restorations in the current prosthetic dentistry practice as an alternative to other, well-established methods of corono-radicular restorations and the evolving palette of adhesive materials has made these restorations more popular in the last few years.
The purpose is to review the available literature about Endocrown restorations regarding mechanical properties - fracture strength and resistance, survival rate, the preparation design - marginal and internal adaptation, and esthetics.
The search was carried out on four databases: PubMed, Scopus (ScienceDirect), Web of Science, and Scielo using the following terms: "endocrowns", "endodontic crown", and" no buildup crown". Initially, a total of 163 articles published between 2015 and May 2021 were selected. After the duplicates, papers presented only as abstracts, articles in any other languages except English, and review articles were eliminated; a total of 72 articles remained to be considered for this review.After assessing the 72 considered articles, 37 were chosen as fit for this review. The reasons for the elimination of the other 35 articles were: their main focus was other than endocrowns, e.g., direct restorations, indirect restorations of vital teeth; case reports; study protocols.
From the 37 articles selected, 34 were focused on mechanical properties, including the influence of the preparation design, and three on survival rate, of which one also had a point of view regarding esthetics.
The literature included in this review shows that endocrowns perform similarly or even better in some cases than other coronal restorations. However, this statement must be interpreted cautiously, given that most articles were or finite element analysis studies. Given the high degree of conflicting results found in the articles included in this review, the authors consider as reasonable to conclude that further studies are needed to confirm the feasibility of endocrowns and the best choice of material.
在当前的口腔修复实践中，使用牙内冠修复体作为其他成熟的冠根修复方法的替代方案，以及不断发展的粘结材料种类，使得这些修复体在过去几年中越来越受欢迎。
旨在回顾有关牙内冠修复体的现有文献，内容涉及机械性能——断裂强度和抗力、生存率、预备设计——边缘和内部适合性以及美学效果。
在四个数据库中进行检索：PubMed、Scopus（ScienceDirect）、科学网和Scielo，使用以下检索词：“牙内冠”、“根管冠”和“无桩冠”。最初，共筛选出2015年至2021年5月发表的163篇文章。剔除重复文章、仅以摘要形式呈现的论文、非英文的任何其他语言的文章以及综述文章后，共有72篇文章留待本综述考虑。在评估这72篇纳入文章后，选择了37篇适合本综述的文章。剔除其他35篇文章的原因是：其主要关注点不是牙内冠，例如直接修复、活髓牙的间接修复；病例报告；研究方案。
从所选的37篇文章中，34篇关注机械性能，包括预备设计的影响，3篇关注生存率，其中1篇也涉及美学观点。
本综述纳入的文献表明，牙内冠在某些情况下的表现与其他冠修复体相似，甚至更好。然而，鉴于大多数文章是体外研究或有限元分析研究，这一说法必须谨慎解读。鉴于本综述纳入的文章中发现的高度冲突的结果，作者认为有理由得出结论，需要进一步研究以证实牙内冠的可行性和材料的最佳选择。
