Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of Different Materials and Techniques on Stress Distribution in CAD/CAM Endocrowns

  • Published:
Strength of Materials Aims and scope

Computer-aided design/manufacturing (CAD/CAM) endocrowns are commonly applied to strengthen endodontically treated teeth with too much tissue loss. Monolithic or multilayer structures may be used for this purpose. Restorations made with multilayering technique may mimic natural teeth better. The purpose of this finite elemental analysis (FEA) research was to appraise the impact of different materials and application methods on the stress effect in CAD/CAM applied endocrowns. A 3-dimensional mathematical model simulating an endodontically treated mandibular first molar was modeled. The sample was then modified to imitate the ceramic endocrown applied molar tooth. Three FEA models were then created from this main model to simulate the following endocrown structures: 1: lithium disilicate reinforced glass ceramic, 2: monolithic zirconia, 3: multi-layered glass ceramic and glass-fiber endocrown (the core structure was composed of glass-fiber while the crown is prepared by glass ceramic). The SolidWorks/CosmosWorks programs were used as structural analysis programs. The materials used in the study were accepted as homogeneous and isotropic. A 300 N load was applied to the occlusal surfaces of the restored teeth. The results of the study are presented according to the von Mises criteria. The von Mises stresses recorded at the cavity base were 0.417–0.7, 0.6–0.85, and 0.083–0.25 MPa, respectively. The multilayering technique reduced stresses as compared to the other two different designs and materials and showed similar stress distributions with the natural tooth model. Models simulating teeth with a zirconia endocrown showed the highest stresses. The multilayering technique using fiber-reinforced glass ceramic as a core and glass ceramic as a crown reduced the stresses and showed stress distributions similar to natural teeth. This technique can be used to create biomimetic restorations with a core material, which mimics dentin (glass-fiber reinforced ceramic) and crown material, which mimics enamel (glass ceramic).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. G. Aktas, H. Yerlikaya, and K. Akca, “Mechanical failure of endocrowns manufactured with different ceramic materials: an in vitro biomechanical study,” J. Prosthodont., 27, 340–346 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Bakke, L. Michler, and E. Moller, “Occlusal control of mandibular elevator muscles,” Eur. J. Oral Sci., 100, 284–291 (1992).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. S. Belli, G. Eskitaşcioğlu, O. Eraslan, et al., “Effect of hybrid layer on stress distribution in a premolar tooth restored with composite or ceramic inlay: an FEM study,” J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B, 74, 665–668 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  4. G. Biacchi and R. Basting, “Comparison of fracture strength of endocrowns and glass fiber post-retained conventional crowns,” Oper. Dent., 37, 130–136 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. A. Bindl and W. H. Mörmann, “Clinical evaluation of adhesively placed Cerec endo-crowns after 2 years-preliminary results,” J. Adhes. Dent., 1, 255–266 (1999).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. A. Bindl, B. Richter, and W. H. Mörmann, “Survival of ceramic computer-aided design/manufacturing crowns bonded to preparations with reduced macroretention geometry,” Int. J. Prosthodont., 18, 219–224 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Blatz, M. Vonderheide, and J. Conejo, “The effect of resin bonding on long-term success of high-strength ceramics,” J. Dent. Res., 97, 132–139 (2018).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. F. Burke, G. J. P. Fleming, D. Nathanson, and P. M. Marquis, “Are adhesive technologies needed to support ceramics? An assessment of the current evidence,” J. Adhes. Dent., 4, 7–22 (2002).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. M.-S. Cha, S.-W. Lee, Y.-H. Huh, et al., “Metal stain on monolithic zirconia restoration: A case report,” J. Adv. Prosthodont., 9, 138–142 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Y.-H. Chang, W.-H. Lin, W.-C. Kuo, et al., “Mechanical interactions of cuspal-coverage designs and cement thickness in a cusp-replacing ceramic premolar restoration: a finite element study,” Med. Bio. Eng. Comput., 47, 367–374 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Chen and L. Xu, “A finite element analysis of the human temporomandibular joint,” J. Biomech. Eng., 116, 401–407 (1994).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. H. M. El-Damanhoury, R. N. Haj-Ali, and J. A. Platt, “Fracture resistance and microleakage of endocrowns utilizing three CAD-CAM blocks,” Oper. Dent., 40, 201–210 (2015).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ö. Eraslan, G. Eskitaşcioğlu, and S. Belli, “Conservative restoration of severely damaged endodontically treated premolar teeth: a FEM study,” Clin. Oral Investig., 15, 403–408 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  14. N. Forberger and T. N. Göhring, “Influence of the type of post and core on in vitro marginal continuity, fracture resistance, and fracture mode of lithia disilicate-based all-ceramic crowns,” J. Prosthet. Dent., 100, 264–273 (2008).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. B. M. Gillen, S. W. Looney, L.-S. Gu, et al., “Impact of the quality of coronal restoration versus the quality of root canal fillings on success of root canal treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” J. Endodont., 37, 895–902 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. M. Gresnigt, M. Özcan, M. L. van den Houten, et al., “Fracture strength, failure type and Weibull characteristics of lithium disilicate and multiphase resin composite endocrowns under axial and lateral forces,” Dent. Mater., 32, 607–614 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. M. A. Helal and Z. Wang, “Biomechanical assessment of restored mandibular molar by endocrown in comparison to a glass fiber post-retained conventional crown: 3D finite element analysis,” J. Prosthodont., 28, 988–996 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  18. F. R. Homsy, M. Özcan, M. Khoury, and Z. A. Majzoub, “Marginal and internal fit of pressed lithium disilicate inlays fabricated with milling, 3D printing, and conventional technologies,” J. Prosthet. Dent., 119, 783–790 (2018).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. J. Juloski, D. Apicella, and M. Ferrari, “The effect of ferrule height on stress distribution within a tooth restored with fibre posts and ceramic crown: a finite element analysis,” Dent. Mater., 30, 1304–1315 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  20. J. R. Kelly, “Dental ceramics: what is this stuff anyway?” J. Am. Dent. Assoc., 139, S4–S7 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  21. C.-L. Lin, Y.-H. Chang, and P.-R. Liu, “Multi-factorial analysis of a cusp-replacing adhesive premolar restoration: a finite element study,” J. Dent., 36, 194–203 (2008).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. C.-L. Lin, Y.-H. Chang, and C.-A. Pa, “Estimation of the risk of failure for an endodontically treated maxillary premolar with MODP preparation and CAD/CAM ceramic restorations,” J. Endodont., 35, 1391–1395 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  23. C. L. Lin, Y. H. Chang, C. Y. Chang, et al., “Finite element and Weibull analyses to estimate failure risks in the ceramic endocrown and classical crown for endodontically treated maxillary premolar,” Eur. J. Oral Sci., 118, 87–93 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  24. P. Magne and U. C. Belser, “Porcelain versus composite inlays/onlays: effects of mechanical loads on stress distribution, adhesion, and crown flexure,” Int. J. Periodont. Rest., 23, 543-555 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  25. P. Magne, N. Perakis, U. C. Belser, and I. Krejci, “Stress distribution of inlay-anchored adhesive fixed partial dentures: a finite element analysis of the influence of restorative materials and abutment preparation design,” J. Prosthet. Dent., 87, 516–528 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  26. P. Magne, A. Versluis, and W. H. Douglas, “Rationalization of incisor shape: experimental-numerical analysis,” J. Prosthet. Dent., 81, 345–355 (1999).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. J. M. Mendez Carames, A. D. Sola Pereira da Mata, D. N. da Silva Marques, and H. C. de Oliveira Francisco, “Ceramic-veneered zirconia frameworks in full-arch implant rehabilitations: A 6-month to 5-year retrospective cohort study,” Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants, 31, 1407–1414 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  28. S. Miura, S. Kasahara, S. Yamauchi, and H. Egusa, “Effect of finish line design on stress distribution in bilayer and monolithic zirconia crowns: a three-dimensional finite element analysis study,” Eur. J. Oral Sci., 126, 159–165 (2018).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. S. M. Morgano, “Restoration of pulpless teeth: application of traditional principles in present and future contexts,” J. Prosthet. Dent., 75, 375–380 (1996).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. T. Otto, “Computer-aided direct all-ceramic crowns: preliminary 1-year results of a prospective clinical study,” Int. J. Periodont. Rest., 24, 446–455 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  31. P. Pissis, “Fabrication of a metal-free ceramic restoration utilizing the monobloc technique,” Pract. Periodontics Aesthet Dent., 7, 83–94 (1995).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. S. M. Reich, M. Wichmann, H. Rinne, and A. Shortall, “Clinical performance of large, all-ceramic CAD/CAM-generated restorations after three years: a pilot study,” J. Am. Dent. Assoc., 135, 605–612 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  33. C.-L. Lin, Y.-H. Chang, S.-K. Hsieh, and W.-J. Chang, “Estimation of the failure risk of a maxillary premolar with different crack depths with endodontic treatment by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic restorations,” J. Endodont., 39, 375–379 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  34. G. T. Rocca, C. M. Saratti, A. Poncet, et al., “The influence of FRCs reinforcement on marginal adaptation of CAD/CAM composite resin endocrowns after simulated fatigue loading,” Odontology, 104, 220–232 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. A. Kishen, “Mechanisms and risk factors for fracture predilection in endodontically treated teeth,” Endodont. Topics, 13, 57–83 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  36. A. Lanza, R. Aversa, S. Rengo, et al., “3D FEA of cemented steel, glass and carbon posts in a maxillary incisor,” Dent. Mater., 21, 709–715 (2005).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. L. Shamseddine, R. Mortada, K. Rifai, and J. J. Chidiac, “Fit of pressed crowns fabricated from two CAD-CAM wax pattern process plans: A comparative in vitro study,” J. Prosthet. Dent., 118, 49–54 (2017).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. M. Toparli, N. Gokay, and T. Aksoy, “Analysis of a restored maxillary second premolar tooth by using three-dimensional finite element method,” J. Oral Rehabil., 26, 157–164 (1999).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. D. Tortopidis, M. Lyons, R. Baxendale, and W. Gilmour, “The variability of bite force measurement between sessions, in different positions within the dental arch,” J. Oral Rehabil., 25, 681–686 (1998).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. J. P. M. Tribst, A. M. O. Dal Piva, C. F. L. Madruga, et al., “Endocrown restorations: Influence of dental remnant and restorative material on stress distribution,” Dent. Mater., 34, 1466–1473 (2018).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. J. W. van Dijken, L. Hasselrot, A. Ormin, and A. L. Olofsson, “Restorations with extensive dentin/enamel-bonded ceramic coverage. A 5-year follow-up,” Eur. J. Oral Sci., 109, 222–229 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  42. V. Veselinovic, A. Todorovic, D. Lisjak, and V. Lazic, “Restoring endodontically treated teeth with all-ceramic endo-crowns: case report,” Stomatoloski Glasnik Srbije, 55, 54–64 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  43. R. C. Wheeler, Dental Anatomy, Physiology, and Occlusion, Saunders (1974).

  44. Ö. Küçük, O. Eraslan, G. Eskitascioglu, and S. Belli, “Effect of loading direction, crown coverage, and adjacent teeth on stresses in post-restored premolars,” Strength Mater, 52, No. 2, 317–324 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was supported in part by the Scientific Research Project Coordination Center (BAP) of Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Dentistry, Yüzüncü Yil University, Van, Turkey

    M. Eskitaşçioğlu

  2. Provincial Health Institution, Konya, Turkey

    O. Küçük

  3. Pi Academic Education Center, Ankara, Turkey

    G. Eskitaşçioğlu

  4. Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Selçuk University, Konya, Turkey

    O. Eraslan

  5. Department of Endodontics; Faculty of Dentistry, Selçuk University, Konya, Turkey

    S. Belli

Authors
  1. M. Eskitaşçioğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. O. Küçük
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. Eskitaşçioğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. O. Eraslan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Belli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. Küçük.

Additional information

Translated from Problemy Prochnosti, No. 5, pp. 139 – 146, September – October, 2020.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eskitaşçioğlu, M., Küçük, O., Eskitaşçioğlu, G. et al. The Effect of Different Materials and Techniques on Stress Distribution in CAD/CAM Endocrowns. Strength Mater 52, 812–819 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11223-020-00235-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11223-020-00235-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation