ArticleCureus2024
Evaluation of E-max Porcelain Veneer Failures: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim This retrospective study aimed to evaluate if E-max veneers over five years caused changes in gingival, periodontal health, and veneer failures. Background As aesthetic dentistry progresses, dental veneers are becoming increasingly popular in both general and specialized dental practices. Due to technological advancements in dental ceramics and adhesive systems, porcelain veneers have become a highly sought-after solution for improving aesthetics in dental patients. The success of porcelain laminate veneers, a commonly used method for aesthetic restoration, relies on various factors. E-max veneers are frequently utilized, with their long-term durability contingent upon factors such as color stability, resistance to abrasion, as well as good compressive, tensile, and shear strength, along with maintaining marginal integrity. Methodology In this study, data was collected through a checklist form used to record clinical parameters. The clinical parameters evaluated were inflammation and bleeding on probing (BOP). The gingival health was evaluated by gingival index, gingival color, texture, and bleeding on probing, and periodontal health was evaluated by the pocket depth and radiographic evaluations. Finally, the veneer was visually inspected for chipping, staining, and debonding history. The score for most of the cases ranged between 0-1, with only 10 cases displaying moderate gingival inflammation and BOP (Gingival Index 2). Siemens Orthopantomogram (OPG) systems were used for radiological evaluation and documentation of cases. E-max porcelain veneers were only included in the research. Results Out of 28 patients, each with 6-to-10-unit veneer cases was examined, 18 patients (64.3%) displayed healthy gingival status with no bleeding area recorded in none of the veneers amongst the 6 to 10 units. In 10 patients (35.7%) most of the veneers had inflamed gingival tissue that was bleeding on probing. The majority revealed the presence of stippling (92.9%), absence of recession (96.4%), and pocket depth (67.9%). Half of our participants had their veneer for more than five years (50%) and the majority presented with no significant changes in veneer recorded like marginal staining, debonding, or chipping (89.3%). Conclusion Multiple factors such as patient selection, proper treatment planning, and design, including material selection, play a significant role in the long-lasting success of ceramic veneers. The retrospective study indicated that proper oral hygiene measures are vital for the long-term sustainability of E max veneers.
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.