Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40755189›Full record

ArticleJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2025

Survival of Ceramic Veneers: Impact of Dentin Exposure and Tooth Vitality After 1 to 15 Years of Follow-Up.

Olivier Etienne, Caroline Jiamiao Wang, Rim Bourgi, Dominique Watzki, Tatiana Roman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Survival of Ceramic Veneers: Impact of Dentin Exposure and Tooth Vitality After 1 to 15 Years of Follow-Up.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Olivier EtienneDDS, Department of Prosthodontics, Robert Frank Faculty of Dental Surgery, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8870-4659
Caroline Jiamiao WangDDS, Department of Prosthodontics, Robert Frank Faculty of Dental Surgery, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Rim BourgiInserm UMR 1121, "Biomaterials & Bioengineering", CRBS, Strasbourg, France.ORCID 0000-0002-8003-2664
Dominique WatzkiCeramist, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, France.
Tatiana RomanDDS, Department of Prosthodontics, Robert Frank Faculty of Dental Surgery, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.ORCID 0000-0001-9796-0400

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis retrospective clinical study aimed to evaluate the survival rates of ceramic laminate veneers in relation to dentin exposure, endodontic treatment, preparation design, and the type of dual-cure resin cement used. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 672 veneers were placed in 189 patients and followed for 1 to 15 years. Veneer supporting teeth were categorized after etching based on the degree of dentin exposure into three groups: GA1 (enamel only), GA2 (< 30% dentin), and GA3 (> 30% dentin). Additional variables included endodontic treatment, preparation design, and the resin cement system used. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, Log-Rank tests (α = 0.05), and Odds Ratios (ORs) were computed. All procedures were performed by a single clinician, veneers were fabricated by a single ceramist, and the study was performed by a different, single examiner.

resultsThe cumulative 15-year estimated survival rate was 96%, mean survival 5.98 years. Veneers in the GA1 group showed an estimated survival rate of 96.7%, compared to 95.3% in GA2 and 93.9% in GA3. A statistically significant difference was found between GA1 and GA3 (p = 0.033). Endodontically treated teeth and those with dentin exposure exhibited higher risks of failure (OR = 1.68 and 3.47, respectively). Endodontic treatment, preparation design, and resin cement type did not significantly affect survival (p > 0.05).

conclusionsThe extent of dentin exposure significantly impacts the survival of bonded ceramic veneers after 1 to 15 years of follow-up. Preservation of enamel is critical for optimizing outcomes. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: These findings suggest that meticulous patient selection, preparation techniques, optimal bonding protocols, and bonding exclusively to enamel, whenever possible, are essential for ensuring the clinical success of CLV bonded with dual-cured resin.

Indexed as

CeramicsDental VeneersDentinAdolescentAdultDental Restoration FailureFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedResin CementsRetrospective StudiesResin Cementsceramic veneersdentin exposuredual‐cure resin cementsenamel preservationKaplan–Meier survivalretrospective study

Identifiers

PMID40755189
PMCPMC12618969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.