The fracture resistance of pulpotomized primary molars restored with zirconia crowns, lithium disilicate or resin based ceramic endocrowns.

BACKGROUND

Endocrown in pediatric dentistry was rooted in the fundamental principles of preserving healthy dental tissues, leveraging contemporary adhesive methodologies.

AIM

This research aimed on assessing and comparing the fracture resistance of pulpotomized primary molars when rehabilitated with zirconia crowns and two distinct types of endocrowns, namely E-Max and Brilliant Crios.

METHODS

The study involved thirty, anonymized, freshly extracted second primary molars that underwent pulpotomy. These teeth were then evenly divided into three groups, each consisting of ten specimens: the zirconia crown, the E-Max endocrown, and the Brilliant Crios endocrown groups. Post-pulpotomy, the teeth were prepared for their respective restorations. Subsequent to this preparation, the zirconia crowns, E-Max endocrowns, and Brilliant Crios endocrowns were secured. To evaluate the fracture resistance using a computer-controlled testing machine (Instron), a progressively increasing load was applied to each group until fracture occurred. The gathered data were then analyzed for outliers and subjected to normality testing using the Shapiro-Wilk and/or Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, with a significance threshold set at 0.05.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in fracture resistance of pulpotomized primary molars among lithium disilicate (E-Max) group (mean=1367.59N), Brilliant Crios group (mean=1349.73N) and zirconia group (mean=1240.82N).

CONCLUSION

Endocrowns can be considered a promising restoration for pulpotomized primary molars.