Abstract: ob＜x＞jective To compare the clinical efficacy of three different materials of endocrowns for the treatment of severe crown defects in the molars. Methods 95 molars with severe crown defects of the 81 patients who were treated in our department from September 2016 to December 2017 were selected，and were into three groups according to the restorative materials: the polymeric porcelain endocrown(group A ),the zirconia all-ceramic endocrown(group B),the gold-palladium alloy porcelain(group C). The follow up time was 6 months and 12 months later. The clinical effect and the patient satisfaction of the three groups were compared. Results There was no significant difference in the accuracy of restoration, edge coloration, edge adhesion, secondary caries and surface texture after 6 months of repair(P>0.05). After 12 months of repair, the morphology and surface texture of group A and group B were higher than those of group C (P<0.05); the pass rate of edge coloring and edge adhesion in group B and C was higher than that in group A (P<0.05). At 6 months, the difference of the complication rate among the three groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). At 12 months, the total incidence of complications in the three groups was significantly different (P<0.05). The gingival response in group C was higher than that in group A and group B(P<0.05). After 12 months of follow-up, the satisfaction of the patients with the three kinds of endocrowns was almost the same, the three groups were not statistically significant(P>0.05).Conclusion Under the condition of applying pulp chamber retention, three kinds of endocrowns with different materials have their own advantages and disadvantages. It should be selected according to the needs of patients and the actual situation.