Fracture resistance of mandibular molar endocrown with different preparation designs: an in vitro study
- 1Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia
- 2Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Abstract
Background: Endocrowns have gained popularity as a conservative option for restoring endodontically treated molars because their success rates are comparable to those of conventional crowns. However, there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of different endocrown marginal designs, particularly concerning their fracture resistance and failure modes under axial and oblique loading. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance and failure modes of three different endocrown marginal designs on mandibular molars and compare them with endocrowns under axial and oblique loading.
Methods: Sixty-four extracted mandibular molars were root-treated and lined with flowable composite (1.5 mm thickness) before being embedded in epoxy resin blocks. The samples were divided into four groups ( n = 16): three endocrown groups with different preparation designs (butt-joint, 0.8 mm chamfer, and 1.0 mm shoulder) and one group with conventional crowns. Crown preparations were performed with a high-speed handpiece mounted on a modified milling device, targeting a 2.0 mm anatomical occlusal reduction for conventional crowns and a 4.0 mm central chamber depth with a 2.0 mm axial wall height (ferrule) for endocrowns (except the butt-joint design, which had no ferrule preparation). Restorations were fabricated using the Chairside Economical Restoration of Esthetic Ceramics (CEREC) Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system with lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD; minimum occlusal thickness: 1.5 mm) as the restorative material and cemented with the RelyX Ultimate dual-cure resin adhesive. After 1,500 thermocycling cycles, the samples were divided into two subgroups ( n = 8) for axial and oblique loading tests. The fracture resistance was tested using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min, applying a load of up to 5,000 N until fracture. Failure modes were examined using a stereomicroscope at 5x magnification and categorized as catastrophic or non-catastrophic. The mean fracture resistance was compared using one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni post-hoc tests, and Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the association between preparation designs and failure modes ( p < 0.05).
Results: Endocrowns with shoulder margins showed significantly higher fracture resistance (3,042.83 ± 850.76 N) than conventional crowns (1,908.28 ± 635.82 N) under axial loading ( p = 0.02). No significant differences were found under oblique loading between the preparation designs. The preparation design significantly influenced the failure mode under axial loading ( p = 0.049). Endocrowns exhibited a higher rate of catastrophic fractures than conventional crowns, regardless of loading direction.
Conclusions: Endocrowns provide a conservative alternative to conventional crowns, offering a higher fracture resistance under axial loading. Further research is needed to evaluate the endocrown performance under oblique loading.
Related
- Multiscale fracture resistance of human annulus fibrosus and its deterioration with degeneration
- Distribution of target-site resistance mechanisms to nicosulfuron and glyphosate in Amaranthus palmeri accessions from two different regions of Turkiye
- Comparative Effects of Different Carbohydrate–Protein Formulations on Resistance Training Adaptations in Healthy Young Men
- Integrated microbiome and metabolome analysis reveals mechanisms of Fusarium wilt resistance in banana rhizosphere soil under different continuous cropping durations
- Cervico-vaginal microbiota and antimicrobial resistance patterns in relation to different reproductive statuses in cattle: a field study from Nepal.
BibTeX
@article{iskanderdzulkarnein2026fracture,
title = {{Fracture resistance of mandibular molar endocrown with different preparation designs: an in vitro study}},
author = {Pengiran Muhammad Badi’uzzaman Awang Iskanderdzulkarnein and Noorhayati Raja Mohd and Anas Hakimee Ahmad Ubaidillah and Muhammad Aliff Ikram Noor Zari and Siti Fauzza Ahmad and Eshamsul Sulaiman},
journal = {PeerJ},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.7717/peerj.21801},
url = {https://peerj.com/articles/21801},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Fracture resistance of mandibular molar endocrown with different preparation designs: an in vitro study
AU - Pengiran Muhammad Badi’uzzaman Awang Iskanderdzulkarnein
AU - Noorhayati Raja Mohd
AU - Anas Hakimee Ahmad Ubaidillah
AU - Muhammad Aliff Ikram Noor Zari
AU - Siti Fauzza Ahmad
AU - Eshamsul Sulaiman
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/22
JO - PeerJ
DO - 10.7717/peerj.21801
UR - https://peerj.com/articles/21801
AB - Background: Endocrowns have gained popularity as a conservative option for restoring endodontically treated molars because their success rates are comparable to those of conventional crowns. However, there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of different endocrown marginal designs, particularly concerning their fracture resistance and failure modes under axial and oblique loading. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance and failure modes of three different endocrown marginal designs on mandibular molars and compare them with endocrowns under axial and oblique loading. Methods: Sixty-four extracted mandibular molars were root-treated and lined with flowable composite (1.5 mm thickness) before being embedded in epoxy resin blocks. The samples were divided into four groups ( n = 16): three endocrown groups with different preparation designs (butt-joint, 0.8 mm chamfer, and 1.0 mm shoulder) and one group with conventional crowns. Crown preparations were performed with a high-speed handpiece mounted on a modified milling device, targeting a 2.0 mm anatomical occlusal reduction for conventional crowns and a 4.0 mm central chamber depth with a 2.0 mm axial wall height (ferrule) for endocrowns (except the butt-joint design, which had no ferrule preparation). Restorations were fabricated using the Chairside Economical Restoration of Esthetic Ceramics (CEREC) Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system with lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD; minimum occlusal thickness: 1.5 mm) as the restorative material and cemented with the RelyX Ultimate dual-cure resin adhesive. After 1,500 thermocycling cycles, the samples were divided into two subgroups ( n = 8) for axial and oblique loading tests. The fracture resistance was tested using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min, applying a load of up to 5,000 N until fracture. Failure modes were examined using a stereomicroscope at 5x magnification and categorized as catastrophic or non-catastrophic. The mean fracture resistance was compared using one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni post-hoc tests, and Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the association between preparation designs and failure modes ( p < 0.05). Results: Endocrowns with shoulder margins showed significantly higher fracture resistance (3,042.83 ± 850.76 N) than conventional crowns (1,908.28 ± 635.82 N) under axial loading ( p = 0.02). No significant differences were found under oblique loading between the preparation designs. The preparation design significantly influenced the failure mode under axial loading ( p = 0.049). Endocrowns exhibited a higher rate of catastrophic fractures than conventional crowns, regardless of loading direction. Conclusions: Endocrowns provide a conservative alternative to conventional crowns, offering a higher fracture resistance under axial loading. Further research is needed to evaluate the endocrown performance under oblique loading.
SN - 2167-8359
ER -