English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate and compare the fracture strength and failure modes of endocrowns, zirconia post, and fiber post supported restorations and predict the clinical outcomes of six different prostheses used for endodontically treated teeth. Sixty (n=10) maxillary central incisors were restored with zirconia post/resin-nano-ceramic crown (ZrRNC), fiber post/resinnano-ceramic crown (FbRNC), zirconia post/lithium disilicate ceramic crown (ZrLDS), fiber post/lithium disilicate ceramic crown (FbLDS), resin-nano-ceramic endocrown (EndoRNC), and lithium disilicate ceramic endocrown (EndoLDS). Fracture strength test was performed. Fracture loads and modes were determined. The EndoLDS group had the highest fracture strength, followed by ZrRNC and EndoRNC group. However the results were not significantly different among groups (p&gt;0.05). The failure modes of the restorations changed according to the restorative materials. Endodontically treated anterior teeth might be restored with endocrowns as well as other post-core restorations, however tooth fracture failures should be considered that affect reliability of endocrowns.

Fracture strength of CAD/CAM fabricated lithium disilicate and resin nano ceramic restorations used for endodontically treated teeth