Abstract
Statement of problem: Endocrown is a recent variety of Onlay; still, dentists have until now to find a comprehensive knowledge of the scientific outcomes of material selection of endocrowns.
Objective: This investigation aimed to determine clinically whether endocrowns are a reliable replacement to post-retained restorations and which materials are best adapted for fabricating endocrowns.
Material and methods: The endocrown evaluation clinical study is an open-label, comparable groups, blinded organized study at Assiut dental university hospitals. A sum of 40 participant will be involved in this study receiving of usual teeth endodontics management, and indicated to endocrown restorations, and will be allocated into three categories in accordance with the material kind (lithium disilicate, monolithic zirconia, and modified PEEK material). Clinical assessments by modified US Public Health Service criteria by two separate assessors. The result will be including the following criteria: Recurrent caries, Proximal contact, occlusal surface contact, Tooth integrity, and Patient satisfaction. All obtained records analysed by an independent statistician.
Results: After an examination interval of 3 years, success rates were 94.87 %. one restoration had to be changed due to clinically undesirable fractures and another after debonding rebonding again. The 3-year survival rate was (94.87%). there was a statistically significant differences for all variables along the 36 months follow up periods starting from 18 m to 36m. there no statically significant differences between monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate but significantly different from modified PEEK materials for all criteria evaluated.
Conclusions: Bonded endocrowns protocol exhibited a promising clinical functioning around an examination time of 3 years (94.87%). Clinical relevance of translucent zirconia, lithium disilicate ceramic, and PEEK endocrowns are an appropriate restorative therapy choice for molar endocrown.