ReviewCureus2023
Conventional Versus Minimally Invasive Veneers: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Survival and Complication Rates of Feldspathic, Leucite-Reinforced, Lithium Disilicate and Zirconia Ceramic Laminate Veneers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025Pooled it
- No-preparation and conventional veneers in esthetic dentistry: Clinical considerations.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Dentin and Enamel Exposure on Upper Incisors for Bonding Buccal Laminated Veneers: Method Validation and Ex Vivo Quantification.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Comparison of the Marginal Integrity of Sectional Non-Invasive Laminate Veneers Versus Sectional Minimally Invasive Laminate Veneers Under Artificial Aging.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Minimally Invasive Esthetic Treatments With an Orthorestorative Integrated Digital Approach: A Case Report.Case reports in dentistry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to synthesize and analyze a collection of studies focused on comparing conventional veneers (CVs) and minimal or no-preparation veneers (MPVs) within the domain of prosthodontics. The review sought to explore various attributes, techniques, outcomes, and considerations associated with these two approaches. The key aspects investigated included esthetics, longevity, periodontal health, patient satisfaction, structural influences such as microleakage and marginal fit, cement thickness, and color stability. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify relevant studies published up to the present date. Studies meeting specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for review. Studies pertaining to various methodologies were identified initially as part of the strategy and bias assessment was performed to determine the credibility of their assessments before inclusion in this review. Four comparative assessments gleaned from the selected studies provided a comprehensive overview of the strengths and limitations associated with CVs and MPVs. MPVs demonstrated advantages such as enhanced survival rates and extended mean success periods, implying their potential as viable long-term restorative options. Meticulous patient management and optimal preparation techniques emerged as crucial factors influencing successful outcomes. Structural attributes, including microleakage and marginal fit, varied depending on the preparation techniques employed. Moreover, considerations related to color changes in veneers underscored the intricate interplay between material properties and fabrication methods. The insights underscore the significance of patient-centric care, precision preparation methodologies, and material choices in guiding successful outcomes. However, the diverse methodologies and constraints of certain studies warrant careful interpretation. This study accentuates the potential for future research directions, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the advancement of evidence-based practices within veneer dentistry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.