Abstract
Endocrowns are a monoblock type of restoration that use the pulp chamber and remaining coronal tooth structure as a means of retention. However, data on their long-term survival and success rates as compared with conventional crowns are lacking.
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to collate published work on endocrowns to assist clinicians in making decisions on when and whether they are an appropriate restorative option with a predictable outcome for extensively damaged endodontically treated teeth.
Databases such as PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar were searched up to June 2019 for clinical and in vitro studies on endocrown survival and success rates. For the meta-analysis, endocrown and conventional crown survival and success rates were compared, and the pooled effects were presented as relative risks and 95% confidence intervals using a random effects model.
Ten studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (3 clinical and 7 in vitro) and were included in the systematic review. The meta-analysis of the clinical studies showed an estimated overall 5-year survival rate of 91.4% for endocrowns and 98.3% for conventional crowns. The estimated overall 5-year success rates were 77.7% for endocrowns and 94% for conventional crowns. There were no significant differences in overall survival or success estimates between the assessed restorations (P>.05).
Additional well-designed clinical studies with long-term assessment are needed; however, endocrowns appear to be a promising conservative restorative option with acceptable long-term survival for endodontically treated posterior teeth in selected patients.