Survival and complications of laminate veneers made from different dental ceramics: a narrative literature review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5335/rfo.v31i1.18228Keywords:
Laminate veneers, Dental veneers, Ceramics, Survival, ComplicationsAbstract
Objective: To map the clinical performance of ceramic materials in veneers, identifying survival rates and associated complications. Methods: An electronic search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE database (July-November/2025) using controlled Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) descriptors for veneers, ceramics, survival, and complications. Filters were applied for English-language studies from the last 10 years, including clinical trials and systematic reviews. After screening 855 articles, 16 were read in full. A narrative review focused on clinical studies was chosen, complemented by a manual search of references from systematic reviews. After including 13 additional articles and subsequently excluding the systematic reviews, the final sample totaled 15 clinical articles. Results: The studies demonstrated high survival rates for all systems: feldspathic ceramics (87.1% to 100% up to 11 years), leucite-reinforced ceramics (88.2% to 100% up to 14 years), lithium disilicate (87% to 100% up to 21 years), and ultra-translucent zirconia (100% at 12 months). The main reported complications were ceramic fractures and debonding. Conclusion: Despite the mechanical and structural differences among the evaluated materials, there were no significant clinical differences in survival rates, indicating that factors such as enamel preparation, rigorous execution of adhesive protocols, and control of parafunctional habits play a more relevant role in longevity than the material alone.
Downloads
References
1. Armalaite J, Jarutiene M, Vasiliauskas A, Sidlauskas A, Svalkauskiene V, Sidlauskas M, et al. Smile aesthetics as perceived by dental students: a cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):225.
2. Abbasi MS, Lal A, Das G, Salman F, Akram A, Ahmed AR, et al. Impact of social media on aesthetic dentistry: General practitioners’ perspectives. Healthcare. 2022;10(10):2055.
3. Demirekin ZB, Turkaslan S. Laminate veneer ceramics in aesthetic rehabilitation of teeth with fluorosis: a 10-year follow-up study. BMC Oral Health. 2022;22(1):42.
4. Morimoto S, Albanesi RB, Sesma N, Agra CM, Braga MM. Main clinical outcomes of feldspathic porcelain and glass-ceramic laminate veneers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and complication rates. Int J Prosthodont. 2016;29(1):38-49.
5. Arif R, Dennison JB, Garcia D, Yaman P. Retrospective evaluation of the clinical performance and longevity of porcelain laminate veneers 7 to 14 years after cementation. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;122(1):31-37.
6. Della Bona A, Kelly JR. The clinical success of all-ceramic restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139(4 Suppl):8S-13S.
7. Klein P, Spitznagel FA, Zembic A, Prott LS, Pieralli S, Bongaerts B, et al. Survival and complication rates of feldspathic, leucite-reinforced, lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramic laminate veneers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2025;37(3):601-619.
8. Zhang Y, Lawn BR. Novel zirconia materials in dentistry. J Dent Res. 2018;97(2):140-147.
9. Zarow M, Hardan L, Szczeklik K, Bourgi R, Cuevas-Suárez CE, Jakubowicz N, et al. Porcelain veneers in vital vs. non-vital teeth: A retrospective clinical evaluation. Bioengineering. 2023;10(2):168.
10. Alqutaibi AY, Saker S, Alghauli MA, Algabri RS, AbdElaziz MH. Clinical survival and complication rate of ceramic veneers bonded to different substrates: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(4):1030-1039.
11. Rother ET. Systematic literature review X narrative review. Acta Paul Enferm. 2007;20(2):5-6.
12. Gresnigt MMM, Cune MS, Schuitemaker J, van der Made SAM, Meisberger EW, Magne P, et al. Performance of ceramic laminate veneers with immediate dentine sealing: an 11-year prospective clinical trial. Dent Mater. 2019;35(7):1042-1052.
13. Smielak B, Armata O, Bojar W. A prospective comparative analysis of the survival rates of conventional vs no-prep/minimally invasive veneers over a mean period of 9 years. Clin Oral Investig. 2022;26(3):3049-3059.
14. Faus-Matoses V, Ruiz-Bell E, Faus-Matoses I, Özcan M, Salvatore S, Faus-Llácer VJ. An 8-year prospective clinical investigation on the survival rate of feldspathic veneers: Influence of occlusal splint in patients with bruxism. J Dent. 2020;99:103352.
15. Nejatidanesh F, Savabi G, Amjadi M, Abbasi M, Savabi O. Five year clinical outcomes and survival of chairside CAD/CAM ceramic laminate veneers: a retrospective study. J Prosthodont Res. 2018;62(4):462-467.
16. Gresnigt MMM, Cune MS, Jansen K, van der Made SAM, Özcan M. Randomized clinical trial on indirect resin composite and ceramic laminate veneers: up to 10-year findings. J Dent. 2019;86:102-109.
17. Rinke S, Pabel AK, Schulz X, Rödiger M, Schmalz G, Ziebolz D. Retrospective evaluation of extended heat-pressed ceramic veneers after a mean observational period of 7 years. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018;30(4):329-337.
18. Rinke S, Bettenhäuser-Hartung L, Leha A, Rödiger M, Schmalz G, Ziebolz D. Retrospective evaluation of extended glass-ceramic laminate veneers after a mean observational period of 10 years. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020;32(5):487-495.
19. Castelnuovo J, Tjan AHL, Phillips K, Nicholls JI, Kois JC. Fracture load and mode of failure of ceramic veneers with different preparations. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83(2):171-180.
20. Malchiodi L, Zotti F, Moro T, De Santis D, Albanese M. Clinical and esthetical evaluation of 79 lithium disilicate multilayered anterior veneers with a medium follow-up of 3 years. Eur J Dent. 2019;13(4):581-588.
21. Soares-Rusu IBL, Villavicencio-Espinoza CA, de Oliveira NA, Wang L, Honório HM, Rubo JH, et al. Clinical evaluation of lithium disilicate veneers manufactured by CAD/CAM compared with heat-pressed methods: randomized controlled clinical trial. Oper Dent. 2021;46(1):4-14.
22. Yuce M, Ulusoy M, Turk AG. Comparison of marginal and internal adaptation of heat-pressed and CAD/CAM porcelain laminate veneers and a 2-year follow-up. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(5):504-510.
23. Aslan YU, Uludamar A, Özkan Y. Clinical performance of pressable glass-ceramic veneers after 5, 10, 15, and 20 years: A retrospective case series study. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019;31(5):415-422.
24. Aslan YU, Uludamar A, Özkan Y. Retrospective analysis of lithium disilicate laminate veneers applied by experienced dentists: 10-year results. Int J Prosthodont. 2019;32(6):471-474.
25. Yousry M, Hammad I, El Halawany M, Aboushelib M. Randomized clinical trial of zirconia laminate veneers sintered by using conventional versus speed process: 1-year follow-up. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;133(6):1474.e1-1474.e9.
26. Shi HY, Pang R, Yang J, Fan D, Cai HX, Jiang HB, et al. Overview of several typical ceramic materials for restorative dentistry. Biomed Res Int. 2022;2022:8451445.
27. Hong N, Yang H, Li J, Wu S, Li Y. Effect of preparation designs on the prognosis of porcelain laminate veneers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Oper Dent. 2017;42(6):E197-E213.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under aCreative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional.
