Article Details

PreviousNext

Is the traditional post-and-core crown still the 'gold standard' for severely damaged teeth? A comprehensive systematic review of 31 biomechanical studies suggests it’s time to rethink our approach. The study compared **Endocrowns** against traditional core-crowns (with and without posts) across molars, premolars, and anterior teeth. The results are a game-changer for restorative planning. ### Key Clinical Findings: **Superior Performance:** In the majority of cases, endocrowns showed **similar or even greater survival rates** under fatigue and monotonic loads compared to traditional crowns. **Stress Management:** For molars and premolars, endocrowns produced **lower stress** within the restorative material. By utilizing the pulp chamber for retention, the restoration behaves more monolithically with the tooth. **Favorable Failure Modes:** This is the most critical takeaway. When endocrowns fail, they tend to fail 'favorably' (e.g., debonding or chipping), whereas post-and-core failures are often catastrophic, leading to non-restorable root fractures. ### Why this matters for your practice: Endocrowns allow for a more **conservative, biomimetic approach**. By skipping the intracanal post space preparation, we preserve radicular dentin and maintain the structural integrity of the root canal system. ### The Verdict: Whether you are restoring a molar or an anterior tooth with severe structural loss, the endocrown is a biomechanically sound—and often superior—alternative to the traditional post-and-crown. **Are you team Endocrown or team Post-and-Core?