Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2021; 15(02): 360-368
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1715914
Review Article

Survival Rates for Porcelain Laminate Veneers: A Systematic Review

Yousra H. AlJazairy
1   Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to analyze and compare the most up-to-date information available on long-term, medium-term, and short-term survival rates of porcelain laminate veneers (PLVs) and investigate the homogeneity in current studies or lack of it. An electronic search was performed using PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EBSCO, Science Direct, Wiley, and Scopus databases. Based on the PRISMA guidelines, the main inclusion criteria consisted of research articles published after the year 2000, in vivo studies with a follow-up period of at least 1 year and reporting of the Kaplan–Meier estimated cumulative survival rates. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the modified systematic assessment list consisting of 24 items. Thirty full-text articles were reviewed in detail. A total of 30 articles met the inclusion criteria and were selected for qualitative synthesis. The remaining 27 publications were retained to discuss the heterogeneity in the current literature and reported longevity of veneer restorations. A conclusive estimation of the longevity of PLVS beyond 20 years is lacking. The availability of evidence in the current literature is limited in terms of sample size and duration of follow-up. However, the majority of studies have concluded that PLVs have high-success rates and predictable patient outcomes. The present literature indicates an increased heterogeneity among research study designs. Researchers should aim for homogeneous study designs that can be included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Keywords

porcelain laminate veneers - longevity - follow-up - failure - ceramic - restorations - homogeneity


Publication History

Article published online:
01 October 2020

© 2020. European Journal of Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Sá TCM, de Carvalho MFF, de Sá JCM, Magalhães CS, Moreira AN, Yamauti M. Esthetic rehabilitation of anterior teeth with different thicknesses of porcelain laminate veneers: An 8-year follow-up clinical evaluation. Eur J Dent 2018; 12 (04) 590-593
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Malchiodi L, Zotti F, Moro T. De Santis D, Albanese M. Clinical and esthetical evaluation of 79 lithium disilicate multilayered anterior veneers with a medium follow-up of 3 years. Eur J Dent 2019; 13 (04) 581-588
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Beltrami R, Ceci M, De Pani G. et al. Effect of different surface finishing/polishing procedures on color stability of esthetic restorative materials: a spectrophotometric evaluation. Eur J Dent 2018; 12 (01) 049-56
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Fradeani M, Redemagni M, Corrado M. Porcelain laminate veneers: 6-  to 12-year clinical evaluation–a retrospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2005; 25 (01) 9-17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Morimoto S, Albanesi RB, Sesma N, Agra CM, Braga MM. Main clinical outcomes of feldspathic porcelain and glass-ceramic laminate veneers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and complication rates. Int J Prosthodont 2016; 29 (01) 38-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 De, FA, da, Costa, G, Borges, BCD, de, Assunção, IV. Clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers with minimal preparation: a systematic review. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2016; 5 (01) 56-59
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Layton DM, Clarke M, Walton TR. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the survival of feldspathic porcelain veneers over 5 and 10 years. Int J Prosthodont 2012; 25 (06) 590-603
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Burke FJ. Survival rates for porcelain laminate veneers with special reference to the effect of preparation in dentin: a literature review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2012; 24 (04) 257-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kreulen CM, Creugers NHJ, Meijering AC. Meta-analysis of anterior veneer restorations in clinical studies. J Dent 1998; 26 (04) 345-353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Coelho-de-Souza FH, Gonçalves DS, Sales MP. et al. Direct anterior composite veneers in vital and non-vital teeth: a retrospective clinical evaluation. J Dent 2015; 43 (11) 1330-1336
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Fabbri G, Zarone F, Dellificorelli G. et al. Clinical evaluation of 860 anterior and posterior lithium disilicate restorations: retrospective study with a mean follow-up of 3 years and a maximum observational period of 6 years. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2014; 34 (02) 165-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Gresnigt MM, Kalk W, Ozcan M. Randomized clinical trial of indirect resin composite and ceramic veneers: up to 3-year follow-up. J Adhes Dent 2013; 15 (02) 181-190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Rinke S, Lange K, Ziebolz D. Retrospective study of extensive heat-pressed ceramic veneers after 36 months. J Esthet Restor Dent 2013; 25 (01) 42-52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Nordbø H, Rygh-Thoresen N, Henaug T. Clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers without incisal overlapping: 3-year results. J Dent 1994; 22 (06) 342-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Karagözoğlu İ, Toksavul S, Toman M. 3D quantification of clinical marginal and internal gap of porcelain laminate veneers with minimal and without tooth preparation and 2-year clinical evaluation. Quintessence Int 2016; 47 (06) 461-471
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Oztürk E, Bolay S. Survival of porcelain laminate veneers with different degrees of dentin exposure: 2-year clinical results. J Adhes Dent 2014; 16 (05) 481-489
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Cötert HS, Dündar M, Oztürk B. The effect of various preparation designs on the survival of porcelain laminate veneers. J Adhes Dent 2009; 11 (05) 405-411
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 D’Arcangelo C, De Angelis F, Vadini M, D’Amario M. Clinical evaluation on porcelain laminate veneers bonded with light-cured composite: results up to 7 years. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16 (04) 1071-1079
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Xu SP, Luo XP, Shi YJ. [Esthetic restoration for anterior teeth with the hot pressed porcelain laminate veneers]. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue 2012; 21 (05) 572-575
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Smales RJ, Etemadi S. Long-term survival of porcelain laminate veneers using two preparation designs: a retrospective study. Int J Prosthodont 2004; 17 (03) 323-326
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Magne P, Perroud R, Hodges JS, Belser UC. Clinical performance of novel-design porcelain veneers for the recovery of coronal volume and length. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2000; 20 (05) 440-457
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Shaini FJ, Shortall ACC, Marquis PM. Clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers. A retrospective evaluation over a period of 6.5 years. J Oral Rehabil 1997; 24 (08) 553-559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Fradeani M. Six-year follow-up with Empress veneers. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1998; 18 (03) 216-225
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Aykor A, Ozel E. Five-year clinical evaluation of 300 teeth restored with porcelain laminate veneers using total-etch and a modified self-etch adhesive system. Oper Dent 2009; 34 (05) 516-523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Guess PC, Stappert CF. Midterm results of a 5-year prospective clinical investigation of extended ceramic veneers. Dent Mater 2008; 24 (06) 804-813
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Murphy E, Ziada HM, Allen PF. Retrospective study on the performance of porcelain laminate veneers delivered by undergraduate dental students. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2005; 13 (01) 38-43
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Aristidis GA, Dimitra B. Five-year clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers. Quintessence Int 2002; 33 (03) 185-189
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P, Vuylsteke-Wauters M, Vanherle G. Five-year clinical performance of porcelain veneers. Quintessence Int 1998; 29 (04) 211-221
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Gurel G, Sesma N, Calamita MA, Coachman C, Morimoto S. Influence of enamel preservation on failure rates of porcelain laminate veneers. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2013; 33 (01) 31-39
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Granell-Ruiz M, Fons-Font A, Labaig-Rueda C, Martínez-González A, Román-Rodríguez JL, Solá-Ruiz MF. A clinical longitudinal study 323 porcelain laminate veneers. Period of study from 3 to 11 years. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010; 15 (03) e531-e537
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Dumfahrt H, Schäffer H. Porcelain laminate veneers. A retrospective evaluation after 1 to 10 years of service: Part II–Clinical results. Int J Prosthodont 2000; 13 (01) 9-18
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Burke FJT, Lucarotti PSK. Ten-year outcome of porcelain laminate veneers placed within the general dental services in England and Wales. J Dent 2009; 37 (01) 31-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Peumans M, De Munck J, Fieuws S, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G, Van Meerbeek B. A prospective ten-year clinical trial of porcelain veneers. J Adhes Dent 2004; 6 (01) 65-76
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Friedman MJ. A 15-year review of porcelain veneer failure–a clinician’s observations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1998; 19 (06) 625-628, 630, 632 passim, quiz 638
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Layton D, Walton T. An up to 16-year prospective study of 304 porcelain veneers. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20 (04) 389-396
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Layton DM, Walton TR. The up to 21-year clinical outcome and survival of feldspathic porcelain veneers: accounting for clustering. Int J Prosthodont 2012; 25 (06) 604-612
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Hoy D, Brooks P, Woolf A. et al. Assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies: modification of an existing tool and evidence of interrater agreement. J Clin Epidemiol 2012; 65 (09) 934-939
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Olley RC, Andiappan M, Frost PM. An up to 50-year follow-up of crown and veneer survival in a dental practice. J Prosthet Dent 2018; 119 (06) 935-941
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Beier US, Kapferer I, Burtscher D, Dumfahrt H. Clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers for up to 20 years. Int J Prosthodont 2012; 25 (01) 79-85
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Guyatt G, Cairns J, Churchill D. et al. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 1992; 268 (17) 2420-2425
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Slavin RE. Best-evidence synthesis: an alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educ Res 1986; 15 (09) 5-11
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 2007; 4 (03) e78
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Harhash AY, ElSayad II, Zaghloul AGS. A comparative in vitro study on fluoride release and water sorption of different flowable esthetic restorative materials. Eur J Dent 2017; 11 (02) 174-179
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Linhares LA, Pottmaier LF, Lopes GC. Fracture resistance of veneers in premolars. Eur J Dent 2018; 12 (02) 191-198
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Lin DY, Wei LJ. The robust inference for the proportional hazards model. J Am Stat Assoc 1989; 84: 1074-1078
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar