COMPARISON BETWEEN ENDOCROWNS AND CONVENTIONAL CROWNS: A LITERATURE REVIEW

Endocrowns emerge as a promising alternative for the rehabilitation of
extensively destroyed elements, aiming for a more conservative approach than
traditional systems. This literature review aims to deepen knowledge on the
endocrown technique, clarifying its indications, advantages, and clinical
disadvantages. Methodology: A comprehensive search was conducted in the
National Library of Medicine (PubMed) database, using the following descriptors:
Endocrown, Dental restoration, Dental crown, Endodontic treatment. To support this
review, we sought articles published from January 2014 to January 2024, and after a
careful analysis, twenty articles were selected that met the pre-established criteria. Inclusion Criteria: We prioritized articles published in freely accessible journals,
democratizing knowledge. Publication Date: We evaluated articles published in the
last 10 years (from January 2014 to January 2024), ensuring the review was up-to
date. Relevance: We selected only articles that fit the central theme of the review,
ensuring cohesion and quality of the presented material. CONCLUSIONS: It is
concluded that endocrown restorations have proven to be an extremely promising
option for molars extensively destroyed and endodontically treated. However, for
other elements such as premolars, canines, and incisors, current studies have not
shown positive results, which contraindicates the technique in these cases until
further clinical studies indicate otherwise.