ArticleBMC oral health2024
Evaluation of vertical marginal discrepancy and load-to-failure of monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate laminate veneers manufactured in different thicknesses.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Initial effect of dental loupe use on laminate veneer preparation accuracy: an in vitro 3D digital assessment.Odontology · 2026Article
- Marginal and internal fit and fracture resistance of lithium disilicate laminate veneers for teeth with proximal cavities: an in-vitro comparative study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Effect of simulated aging on the color stability and fracture resistance of lithium disilicate laminate veneers with different preparation designs.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Fracture resistance of highly translucent zirconia laminate veneers with different finish line locations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Impact of Thermocycling on the Marginal Discrepancy of Zirconia CAD/CAM Generation on Central Incisors: AnInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Effect of minimally invasive posterior veneer Preparation designs on failure load and mode after fatigue (in-vitro study).BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Clinical Performance of Zirconia Veneers Bonded with MDP-Containing Polymeric Adhesives: A One-Year Randomized Controlled Trial.Polymers · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of monolithic zirconia laminate veneers (MZLV) compared to lithium disilicate laminate veneers (LDLV). MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty resin replicas, each prepared with depths of 0.5 mm, 0.7 mm, and 1 mm, were produced using a 3D printer from acrylic teeth. Laminate veneers of these thicknesses were milled from pre-sintered monolithic zirconia (3rd generation) and lithium disilicate blocks. The intaglio surface of MZLV was treated with air abrasion using 110 μm diameter silica-modified aluminium oxide particles and ceramic primer, while LDLV was etched with etchant gel and treated with the ceramic primer before cementation with resin cement. Vertical marginal discrepancy (VMD) was assessed using a stereomicroscope, and a load-to-failure test was conducted using a universal testing machine. Failure modes were evaluated macroscopically on fractured surfaces. Data were analysed statistically using Two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni correction (α = 0.05).
resultsLDLV samples exhibited significantly larger VMD compared to MZLV samples across all thicknesses, especially in cervical, palatal, and mean data. Within the LDLV group, load-to-fracture values for 0.7 mm and 1.0 mm thicknesses were similar, whereas for 0.5 mm thickness, it was significantly lower. In the MZLV group, load-to-fracture values were lower for 0.7 mm and 1.0 mm thicknesses compared to LDLV, but higher for 0.5 mm thickness.
conclusionsMaterial choice and restoration thickness significantly influence laminate veneer restorations' success. MZLV generally exhibits superior vertical marginal fit compared to LDLV, with varying load-to-failure values across different thicknesses. Clinical management of debonding in MZLV is simpler compared to restoration fracture in LDLV. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Considering clinical factors, MZLV may be a preferable option to LDLV for this restoration with the thickness of 0.5 mm.
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.