Biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated premolars using different preparation designs and CAD/CAM materials

Conclusions Only following a ‘2.5-mm deep endocrown’ design, composite appeared more favorable than lithium disilicate glass-ceramic as crown material; this may be explained by their difference in elastic modulus. Clinical Significance Shallow endocrown preparations on premolars present less surface for adhesive luting and a difference in crown material becomes apparent in terms of load-to-failure. The use of a more flexible composite crown material appeared then a better option.
Source: Journal of Dentistry - Category: Dentistry Source Type: research