Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2024; 18(01): 208-213
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1764421
Original Article

Endocrown Feasibility for Primary Molars: A Finite Element Study

Aeshah Hassan Abduljabar 
1   Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
,
Ahmad Waleed Iskander 
1   Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
,
Mohamed Taha Elfezary 
2   Pediatric Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Al-Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt
,
Mohamed AboElkasem Ahmed Wakwak
2   Pediatric Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Al-Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt
,
Wafa Abdullah Bathabt
1   Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
,
Yasser R. Souror 
2   Pediatric Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Al-Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt
3   Misr University for Science & Technology (MUST) 6th of October City, Giza, Egypt
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To study the possibility of using pediatric endocrowns to restore the second primary molar using three-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis.

Design A 3D finite element model was built for a pediatric mandibular molar, starting with laser scanning a naturally extracted tooth. The access cavity had an elliptic shape with 6 mm width, 4 mm height, and 2 mm depth with a wall taper angle of 5 degrees.

Two materials (Zr and E-max) were tested for the endocrown and two cementing materials (glass ionomer and resin cement) with 20 to 40 μm thickness. Twelve case studies were reported within this research as the applied load of 330 N was tested with three angulations vertical, oblique at 45 degrees, and laterally.

Results Twelve linear static stress analyses were performed. The resultant stresses and deformations' distribution patterns did not alter much, and values were within the threshold of physiological tolerance. Deformations were negligibly changed with changing endocrown and cement materials. In contrast, endocrown stresses indicated zirconia endocrown would have a long lifetime, while E-max one will have a relatively short lifetime.

Conclusions Analysis results indicated that bone was negligibly affected by changing endocrowns and cementing materials. Both tested endocrown materials can be used safely. Zirconia endocrowns may have a much longer lifetime than E-max.

Keywords

primary molar - endocrown - zirconia - E-max - finite analysis

Ethical Approval

This research did not require ethical approval and followed the Helsinki declaration.




Publication History

Article published online:
02 May 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Sheiham A. Dental caries affects body weight, growth and quality of life in pre-school children. Br Dent J 2006; 201 (10) 625-626
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sabel N, Johansson C, Kühnisch J. et al. Neonatal lines in the enamel of primary teeth–a morphological and scanning electron microscopic investigation. Arch Oral Biol 2008; 53 (10) 954-963
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Anderson M. Risk assessment and epidemiology of dental caries: review of the literature. Pediatr Dent 2002; 24 (05) 377-385
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Yengopal V, Harneker SY, Patel N, Siegfried N. Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (02) CD004483
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Full CA, Walker JD, Pinkham JR. Stainless steel crowns for deciduous molars. J Am Dent Assoc 1974; 89 (02) 360-364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sajjanshetty S, Patil PS, Hugar D, Rajkumar K. Pediatric preformed metal crowns - an update. Journal of Dental and Allied Sciences. 2013; 2: 29
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 El Makawi Y, Khattab N. In vitro comparative analysis of fracture resistance of lithium disilicate endocrown and prefabricated zirconium crown in pulpotomized primary molars. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2019; 7 (23) 4094-4100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Clark L, Wells MH, Harris EF, Lou J. Comparison of amount of primary tooth reduction required for anterior and posterior zirconia and stainless-steel crowns. Pediatr Dent 2016; 38 (01) 42-46
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bica C, Pescaru P, Stefanescu A. et al. Applicability of zirconia-prefabricated crowns in children with primary dentition. Rev Chim 2017; 68: 1940-1943
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rocca GT, Saratti CM, Poncet A, Feilzer AJ, Krejci I. The influence of FRCs reinforcement on marginal adaptation of CAD/CAM composite resin endocrowns after simulated fatigue loading. Odontology 2016; 104 (02) 220-232
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Guo J, Wang Z, Li X, Sun C, Gao E, Li H. A comparison of the fracture resistances of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and glass fiber post-core retained conventional crowns. J Adv Prosthodont 2016; 8 (06) 489-493
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Raposo LH, Armstrong SR, Maia RR, Qian F, Geraldeli S, Soares CJ. Effect of specimen gripping device, geometry and fixation method on microtensile bond strength, failure mode and stress distribution: laboratory and finite element analyses. Dent Mater 2012; 28 (05) e50-e62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Al Qahtani WMS, Yousief SA, El-Anwar MI. Recent advances in material and geometrical modelling in dental applications. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2018; 6 (06) 1138-1144 DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2018.254.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sabit A, Mohsen C, El-Anwar M, Metawally M. An in-vitro study of crowned endodontically treated immature permanent central incisor reinforced with different types of aesthetic posts using FEA. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2017; 16 (08) 82-87
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Fathy SM, Anwar MIE, Fallal AAE. et al. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of lower molar tooth restored with fully milled and layered zirconia crowns. J Dent Health Oral Disord Ther 2014; 1 (04) 89-95
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 El-Anwar MI, Tamam RA, Fawzy UM, Yousief SA. The effect of luting cement type and thickness on stress distribution in upper premolar implant restored with metal ceramic crowns. Tanta Dental Journal 2015; 12 (01) 48-55
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Romeed SA, Dunne SM. Stress analysis of different post-luting systems: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Aust Dent J 2013; 58 (01) 82-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ha SR, Kim SH, Han JS. et al. The influence of various core designs on stress distribution in the veneered zirconia crown: a finite element analysis study. J Adv Prosthodont 2013; 5 (02) 187-197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Waly AS, Souror YR, Yousief SA, Alqahtani WMS, El-Anwar MI. Pediatric stainless-steel crown cementation finite element study. Eur J Dent 2021; 15 (01) 77-83
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Guelmann M, Shapira J, Silva DR, Fuks AB. Esthetic restorative options for pulpotomized primary molars: a review of literature. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011; 36 (02) 123-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Dhar V, Hsu KL, Coll JA. et al. Evidence-based update of pediatric dental restorative procedures: dental materials. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015; 39 (04) 303-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Zhu J, Rong Q, Wang X, Gao X. Influence of remaining tooth structure and restorative material type on stress distribution in endodontically treated maxillary premolars: a finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117 (05) 646-655
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Liu C, Eser A, Albrecht T. et al. Strength characterization and lifetime prediction of dental ceramic materials. Dent Mater 2021; 37 (01) 94-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Kamenskikh AA, Sakhabutdinova L, Astashina N, Petrachev A, Nosov Y. Numerical modeling of a new type of prosthetic restoration for non-carious cervical lesions. Materials (Basel) 2022; 15 (15) 5102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Djebbar N, Serier B, Bouiadjra BB, Benbarek S, Drai A. Analysis of the effect of load direction on the stress distribution in dental implant. Mater Des 2010; 31 (04) 2097-2101
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kamposiora P, Papavasiliou G, Bayne SC, Felton DA. Predictions of cement microfracture under crowns using 3D-FEA. J Prosthodont 2000; 9 (04) 201-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ha SR. Biomechanical three-dimensional finite element analysis of monolithic zirconia crown with different cement type. J Adv Prosthodont 2015; 7 (06) 475-483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Santamaria RM, Innes NPT, Machiulskiene V, Evans DJP, Splieth CH. Caries management strategies for primary molars: 1-yr randomized control trial results. J Dent Res 2014; 93 (11) 1062-1069
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dejak B, Młotkowski A. 3D-Finite element analysis of molars restored with endocrowns and posts during masticatory simulation. Dent Mater 2013; 29 (12) e309-e317
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Seddik T, Derelioglu S. Effect of endocrowns on fracture strength and microleakage of endodontically treated primary molar teeth. Journal of Advanced Oral Research. 2019; 10 (02) 113-119
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Dursun E, Monnier-Da Costa A, Moussally C. Chairside CAD/CAM composite onlays for the restoration of primary molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2018; 42 (05) 349-354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Bilgin MS, Erdem A, Tanrıver M. CAD/CAM endocrown fabrication from a polymer-infiltrated ceramic network block for primary molar: a case report. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016; 40 (04) 264-268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar