Mannocci F, Bitter K, Sauro S Present status and future directions: the restoration of root filled teeth. Int Endod J. 2022; 55:1059-1084 https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13796
Mannocci F, Bhuva B, Roig M European Society of Endodontology position statement: the restoration of root filled teeth. Int Endod J. 2021; 54:1974-1981 https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13607
Bhalla VK, Chockattu SJ, Srivastava S, Prasad S. Decision making and restorative planning for adhesively restoring endodontically treated teeth: an update. Saudi Endodontic J. 2020; 10:181-186
Rocca GT, Krejci I. Crown and post-free adhesive restorations for endodontically treated posterior teeth: from direct composite to endocrowns. Eur J Esthet Dent. 2013; 8:156-79
Abu-Awwad M. A modern guide in the management of endodontically treated posterior teeth. Eur J Gen Dent. 2019; 8:63-70
Carvalho MA, Lazari PC, Gresnigt M Current options concerning the endodontically-treated teeth restoration with the adhesive approach. Braz Oral Res. 2018; 32 https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0074
Pascal M, Spreafico RC. Deep margin elevation: a paradigm shift. Am J Esthet Dent. 2012; 2:86-96
Rocca GT, Rizcalla N, Krejci I, Dietschi D. Evidence-based concepts and procedures for bonded inlays and onlays. Part II. Guidelines for cavity preparation and restoration fabrication. Int J Esthet Dent. 2015; 10:392-413
Edelhoff D, Sorensen JA. Tooth structure removal associated with various preparation designs for posterior teeth. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2002; 22:241-249
Al-Fouzan AF, Tashkandi EA. Volumetric measurements of removed tooth structure associated with various preparation designs. Int J Prosthodont. 2013; 26:545-548 https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3221
Srimaneepong V, Heboyan A, Zafar MS Fixed prosthetic restorations and periodontal health: a narrative review. J Funct Biomater. 2022; 13 https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb13010015
Ferraris F. Posterior indirect adhesive restorations (PIAR): preparation designs and adhesthetics clinical protocol. Int J Esthet Dent. 2017; 12:482-502
Dietschi D, Spreafico R. Evidence-based concepts and procedures for bonded inlays and onlays. Part I. Historical perspectives and clinical rationale for a biosubstitutive approach. Int J Esthet Dent. 2015; 10:210-227
AlDabeeb DS, Alakeel NS, Al Jfshar RM, Alkhalid TK. Endocrowns: indications, preparation techniques, and material selection. Cureus. 2023; 15 https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.49947
Milicich G. The compression dome concept: the restorative implications. Gen Dent. 2017; 65:55-60
Malament KA, Margvelashvili-Malament M, Natto ZS Comparison of 16.9-year survival of pressed acid etched e.max lithium disilicate glass-ceramic complete and partial coverage restorations in posterior teeth: Performance and outcomes as a function of tooth position, age, sex, and thickness of ceramic material. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 126:533-545 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.08.013
Using Adhesive Strategies in Molar Rehabilitation after Endodontic Treatment: A Case Series Nikhil Julian Apoorva Walia Tejaswini Shetty Kundabala Mala Manuel S Thomas Dental Update 2025 52:2, 105-110.
Authors
NikhilJulian
BDS, MDS, Private Practitioner, Nikhil Dental Clinic, Kochi, Kerala, India
The shift towards conservative, adhesive, post-endodontic ceramic restorations represents a significant advance in restorative dentistry. By focusing on minimally invasive techniques and the use of adhesive materials, clinicians can achieve better long-term outcomes in terms of tooth preservation, function and aesthetics. The key lies in the careful assessment of each case, ensuring that the chosen restoration aligns with the principles of biomimetic dentistry, which seeks to restore the tooth in a manner that closely mimics its natural form and function. The purpose of this case series is to underscore the significance of adhesive post-endodontic ceramic restorations in the rehabilitation of the form, function and aesthetics of mutilated posterior teeth.
CPD/Clinical Relevance: The use of conservative posterior indirect adhesive restorations can enhance the long-term survival of endodontically treated teeth.
Article
Endodontically treated posterior teeth are more susceptible to fracture owing to several factors, including loss of moisture from the dentine, significant coronal tooth structure loss as a result of carious and non-carious lesions, access cavity preparation and reduced proprioception. Consequently, these teeth are at a greater risk of biomechanical failure.1 In endodontically treated teeth (ETTs), proper coronal restoration is crucial for ensuring favourable outcomes in conjunction with an effective root canal procedure.2,3 The choice of coronal restoration and long-term survival for endodontically treated posterior teeth depends on multiple factors (Table 1).1,3–5
To maintain the harmony between adhesive, mechanical, biological, functional and aesthetic aspects from a biomimetic perspective, the maintenance and conservation of the tooth structure are essential.1 Modern therapeutic practices for restoring ETTs are founded on the concepts of minimally invasive dentistry, which aims to preserve sound tissues. Adhesive procedures are useful for this type of conservative dentistry since they provide adequate material retention without the use of aggressive macro-retention methods.6
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:
