ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
6-year clinical performance of prefabricated and clear template-formed resin composite veneers.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A dual-matrix technique for direct composite veneers using liquid dam and pull-through contouring: a case report.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Surface gloss changes in 3D-printed resin materials following different polishing procedures and aging protocols.BMC oral health · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the clinical performances of prefabricated and direct resin composite veneers used for diastema closure and tooth reshaping over a period of 6 years. MATERIALS AND
methods21 patients (1 male, 20 females; mean age: 35) received a total of 74 anterior restorations. Group 1 was treated with Edelweiss prefabricated veneers (10 patients, 38 teeth) while Group 2 received Ceram-X Duo SphereTec resin composite using U-veneer clear templates (11 patients, 36 teeth). All procedures were performed according to manufacturer's instructions without further mechanical polishing. The veneers were evaluated at baseline, 1, 2, 4, and 6 years by two blinded examiners using modified USPHS criteria. Statistical analysis was performed with Chi-square and Cochrane Q tests (p < 0.05).
resultsSeven patients for the Edelweiss group and eight for the direct resin composite veneer group were evaluated after 6 years. Both techniques were clinically successful/sufficient. Slight polishing loss after the first year was visible in the direct group (p < 0.05). Direct composites showed more marginal discoloration and chipping, while two Edelweiss cases had repairable partial fractures.
conclusionDespite their slight polishing loss over the years and local marginal discolorations/chipping, prefabricated resin composite veneers and direct resin composite veneers performed with U-veneers were found to be successful after 6 years. However, prefabricated resin composite veneers can be applied in less time and can offer esthetic advantages for smokers and heavy coffee drinkers. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Long-term effectiveness was possible with direct and semi-direct resin composite veneer techniques. However, fine polishing and maintenance were needed after yearly recalls for achieving persistent esthetic results especially for direct resin composite 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.