World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Fracture Resistance of Two Preparation Designs on Anterior Laminate Veneers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Beegum Thaj, Asha Joseph, Venkitachalam Ramanarayanan, Prabath Singh, Arjun B Ravi, V Krishnan

Keywords : Butt joint preparation, Chamfer preparation, Fracture resistance, Laminate veneer, Tooth preparation designs, Veneers

Citation Information : Thaj B, Joseph A, Ramanarayanan V, Singh P, Ravi AB, Krishnan V. Fracture Resistance of Two Preparation Designs on Anterior Laminate Veneers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. World J Dent 2022; 13 (6):666-676.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2100

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 26-08-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: This systematic review aims to assess the fracture strength of two different types of tooth preparation designs for ceramic veneers and establish whether there is any association between the preparation performed and the type of failure observed. Background: This systematic review literature search was undertaken in the databases MEDLINE Ovid (from 1946), Scopus, and Google Scholar, as well as a hand search of the references of included publications. Ex vivo and in vitro studies were included. The risk of bias was assessed. Meta-analysis was performed comparing palatal chamfer and butt joint preparation using fracture resistance as an outcome. Review results: A total of 11 studies were included for systematic review and the meta-analysis included 10 studies of relatively high quality. Conclusions: Within the limitations of the current study, it can be concluded that the failure risk of the palatal chamfer and butt joint preparation veneers revealed no statistically significant difference, but further studies are required for validation. Clinical significance: Debonding is the most frequent complication and is found to be associated with lithium disilicate and zirconia restorations. The evidence seems to support the use of both butt joint and palatal chamfer incisal preparation design. In comparison with a specific type of material used for veneer (lithium disilicate and zirconia), the fracture strength of the tooth is unaffected by the palatal chamfer preparation made of, resulting in a lesser risk of failure in ceramic veneers compared to butt joint.

PDF Share
  1. Toh CG, Setcos JC, Weinstein AR. Indirect dental laminate veneers—an overview. J Dent 1987;15(3):117–124. DOI: 10.1016/0300-5712(87)90067-4
  2. Faunce FR, Faunce AR. The use of laminate veneers for restoration of fractured or discolored teeth. Tex Dent J 1975;93(8):6–7.
  3. Beier US, Kapferer I, Burtscher D, et al. Clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers for up to 20 years. Int J Prosthodont 2012;25:79–85.
  4. Shetty A, Kaiwar A, Shubhashini N, et al. Survival rates of porcelain laminate restoration based on different incisal preparation designs: an analysis. J Conserv Dent JCD 2011;14:10–5.
  5. Christensen GJ. Facing the challenges of ceramic veneers. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137(5):661–4.
  6. Lin TM, Liu PR, Ramp LC, et al. Fracture resistance and marginal discrepancy of porcelain laminate veneers influenced by preparation design and restorative material in vitro. J Dent 2012;40(3):202–209. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.12.008
  7. Christensen GJ, Christensen RP. Clinical observations of porcelain veneers: a three-year report. J Esthet Dent 1991;3:174–9.
  8. Dunne SM, Millar BJ. A longitudinal study of the clinical performance of porcelain veneers. Br Dent J 1993;175(9):317–321. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4808314
  9. Belser UC, Magne P, Magne M. Ceramic laminate veneers: continuous evolution of indications. J Esthet Dent 1997;9(4):197–207. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1997.tb00941.x
  10. Clyde JS, Gilmour A. Porcelain veneers: a preliminary review. Br Dent J 1988;164:9–14.
  11. Walls AW, Steele JG, Wassell RW. Crowns and other extra-coronal restorations: porcelain laminate veneers. Br Dent J 2002;193(2):73–82. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4801489
  12. Friedman MJ. A 15-year review of porcelain veneer failure—a clinician's observations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1998;19(2):625–628.
  13. Friedman M. Multiple potential of etched porcelain laminate veneers. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;Spec No:83E–87E. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1987.0317
  14. Zarone F, Apicella D, Sorrentino R, et al. Influence of tooth preparation design on the stress distribution in maxillary central incisors restored by means of alumina porcelain veneers: a 3D-finite element analysis. Dent Mater 2005;21(12):1178–1188. DOI: 10.1016/
  15. Highton R, Caputo AA, Mátyás J. A photoelastic study of stresses on porcelain laminate preparations. J Prosthet Dent 1987;58(2):157–161. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(87)90168-5
  16. Weinberg LA. Tooth preparation for porcelain laminates. N Y State Dent J 1989;55(6):25–28.
  17. Seymour KG, Cherukara GP, Samarawickrama DY. Stresses within porcelain veneers and the composite lute using different preparation designs. J Prosthodont 2001;10(1):16–21. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849x.2001.00016.x
  18. Guess PC, Selz CF, Voulgarakis A, et al. Prospective clinical study of press-ceramic overlap and full veneer restorations: 7-year results. Int J Prosthodont 2014;27(4):355–358. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.3679
  19. Magne P, Versluis A, Douglas WH. Rationalization of incisor shape: experimental-numerical analysis. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81(3):345–355. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(99)70279-9
  20. Cötert HS, Dündar M, Oztürk B. The effect of various preparation designs on the survival of porcelain laminate veneers. J Adhes Dent 2009;11(5):405–411.
  21. Garber D. Porcelain laminate veneers: ten years later. Part I: tooth preparation. J Esthet Dent 1993;5(2):56–62.
  22. Hong N, Yang H, Li J, et al. Effect of preparation designs on the prognosis of porcelain laminate veneers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oper Dent 2017;42(6):E197–E213. DOI: 10.2341/16-390-L
  23. AlShwaimi E, Bogari D, Ajaj R, et al. In vitro antimicrobial effectiveness of root canal sealers against Enterococcus faecalis: a systematic review. J Endod 2016;42(11):1588–1597. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.08.001
  24. Huedo-Medina TB, Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, et al. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? Psychol Methods 2006;11:193–206.
  25. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21(11):1539–1558. DOI: 10.1002/sim.1186
  26. Altabal A, Ragab H, Osman E. Influence of preparation design and presence of class IV composite resin restoration on fracture resistance of ceramic laminate veneer. Med J Babylon 2015;12:1198–1208.
  27. Arora A, Upadhyaya V, Arora S, et al. Evaluation of fracture resistance of ceramic veneers with different preparation designs and loading conditions: an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2017;17(4):325–331. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_37_17
  28. Castelnuovo J, Tjan AHL, Phillips K, et al. Fracture load and mode of failure of ceramic veneers with different preparations. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83(2):171–180. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)80009-8
  29. Essam E, Motawea I, Eltayeb H. Efficacy of incisal preparation designs on the fracture resistance of two CAD/CAM laminate veneers. Egypt Dent J 2017;63(1):975–984. DOI: 10.21608/EDJ.2017.75253
  30. Jankar AS, Kale Y, Kangane S, et al. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of ceramic veneer with three different incisal design preparations—an in-vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2014;6(1):48–54.
  31. Saker S, Özcan M. Marginal discrepancy and load to fracture of monolithic zirconia laminate veneers: the effect of preparation design and sintering protocol. Dent Mater J 2021;40(2):331–338. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2020-007
  32. Schmidt KK, Chiayabutr Y, Phillips KM, et al. Influence of preparation design and existing condition of tooth structure on load to failure of ceramic laminate veneers. J Prosthet Dent 2011;105(6):374–382. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60077-2
  33. Stappert CF, Ozden U, Gerds T, et al. Longevity and failure load of ceramic veneers with different preparation designs after exposure to masticatory simulation. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94(2):132–139. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.05.023
  34. Tamimi S, Essam E, El Guindy J. Effect of different preparation designs on the fracture load of two machinable laminate veneers. Al-Azhar Dent J Girls 2017;4(1):63–70. DOI: 10.21608/ADJG.2017.5197
  35. Vaidya N, Rodrigues S, Hegde P, et al. A comparative evaluation of the effect of different incisal preparations on the fracture resistance and fracture pattern of mandibular anterior porcelain laminate veneers using two different materials—an in vitro study. Indian J Forensic Med Toxicol 2019;13(4):214–219. DOI: 10.5958/0973-9130.2019.00291.3
  36. Zlatanovska KA, Dimova C, Gigovski N, et al. Fracture localisation of porcelain veneers with different preparation designs. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2019;7(10):1675–1679. DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2019.323
  37. Bergoli CD, Meira JB, Valandro LF, et al. Survival rate, load to fracture, and finite element analysis of incisors and canines restored with ceramic veneers having varied preparation design. Oper Dent 2014;39(5):530–540. DOI: 10.2341/13-179
  38. Bragança GF, Mazão JD, Versluis A, et al. Effect of luting materials, presence of tooth preparation, and functional loading on stress distribution on ceramic laminate veneers: a finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2021;125(5):778–787. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.02.005
  39. Chaiyabutr Y, Phillips KM, Ma PS, et al. Comparison of load-fatigue testing of ceramic veneers with two different preparation designs. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22(6):573–575.
  40. Dawood SN, Al-Zahawi AR, Sabri LA. Mechanical and thermal stress behavior of a conservative proposed veneer preparation design for restoring misaligned anterior teeth: a 3D finite element analysis. Appl Sci 2020;10(17):5814. DOI: 10.3390/app10175814
  41. El Badawy A, Abd El Aziz M, Omar E. Effect of laminate veneer designs on abfraction incidence using different loading conditions “finite element analysis”. Egypt Dent J 2019;65:1645–1652. DOI: 10.21608/edj.2019.72635
  42. Gresnigt MMM, Sugii MM, Johanns KBFW, et al. Comparison of conventional ceramic laminate veneers, partial laminate veneers and direct composite resin restorations in fracture strength after aging. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2021;114:104172. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104172
  43. Mohammed B, El-Guindy J. Evaluation of fracture resistance of Cerasmart and lithium disilicate ceramic veneers with different incisal preparation designs: an in vitro study. F1000Research 2019;8:1491. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.20103.1
  44. Soulieman H, Saker R. Fracture resistance of feldspathic veneers with different preparation designs in vitro. Int J Dent Health Sci 2017;4(2):247–255.
  45. Troedson M, Dérand T. Effect of margin design, cement polymerization, and angle of loading on stress in porcelain veneers. J Prosthet Dent 1999;82(5):518–524. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(99)70049-1
  46. Ustun O, Ozturk AN. The evaluation of stress patterns in porcelain laminate veneers with different restoration designs and loading angles induced by functional loads: a three-dimensional finite element analysis study. Niger J Clin Pract 2018;21(3):337–342. DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_45_17
  47. Wall G. Incisal-edge strength of porcelain laminate veneers restoring mandibular incisors. Int J Dent Health Sci 1992;5(5):441–446.
  48. Akoğlu B, Gemalmaz D. Fracture resistance of ceramic veneers with different preparation designs. J Prosthodont Off J Am Coll Prosthodont 2011;20:380–4.
  49. Romanini-Junior JC, Hirata R, Bonfante EA, et al. Monolithic CAD/CAM laminate veneers: Reliability and failure modes. Dent Mater 2020;36(6):724–732. DOI: 10.1016/
  50. Hahn P, Gustav M, Hellwig E. An in vitro assessment of the strength of porcelain veneers dependent on tooth preparation. J Oral Rehabil 2000;27(12):1024–1029. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2000.00640.x
  51. Shirakura A, Lee H, Geminiani A, et al. The influence of veneering porcelain thickness of all-ceramic and metal ceramic crowns on failure resistance after cyclic loading. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101(2):119–127. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60006-8
  52. Wang P, Sun F, Yu Q, et al. Three-dimensional analysis of the relationship between the structure of maxillary central incisor and the preparation of dental all-ceramic. PLoS One 2018;13(12):e0209791. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209791
  53. Blunck U, Fischer S, Hajtó J, et al. Ceramic laminate veneers: effect of preparation design and ceramic thickness on fracture resistance and marginal quality in vitro. Clin Oral Investig 2020;24(8):2745–2754. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-019-03136-z
  54. Chai SY, Bennani V, Aarts JM, et al. Incisal preparation design for ceramic veneers. J Am Dent Assoc 2018;149(1):25–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2017.08.031
  55. Omura Y, Oono K, Uehara K, et al. Studies on stress analysis of laminate veneers. Nichidai Koku Kagaku 1990;16(3):354–360.
  56. Sadighpour L, Geramipanah F, Allahyari S, et al. In vitro evaluation of the fracture resistance and microleakage of porcelain laminate veneers bonded to teeth with composite fillings after cyclic loading. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6(4):278–284. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2014.6.4.278
  57. Silveira RC, Cruz LO. Influence of types of designs of dental structure preparations for aesthetic treatments with ceramic laminates—literature review. Int J Recent Sci Res 2020;11:37901–37910. DOI: 10.24327/ijrsr.2020.1103.5202
  58. Albanesi RB, Pigozzo MN, Sesma N, et al. Incisal coverage or not in ceramic laminate veneers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016;52:1–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.06.004
  59. Jo EH, Huh YH, Ko KH, et al. Effect of different ceramic materials and substructure designs on fracture resistance in anterior restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2020;127(5):785–792. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.056
  60. Mark SK. Comparison of Veneer Preparation Design and Fracture Strength: A Thesis. Uniformed Services University; 2017.
  61. McLaren EA. All-ceramic alternatives to conventional metal-ceramic restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1998;19(3):307–308.
  62. da Costa DC, Coutinho M, de Sousa AS, et al. A meta-analysis of the most indicated preparation design for porcelain laminate veneers. J Adhes Dent 2013;15(3):215–220. DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a29587
  63. Zhang Y, Kelly JR. Dental Ceramics for Restoration and Metal Veneering. Dent Clin North Am 2017;61:797–819.
  64. Gibbs CH, Mahan PE, Lundeen HC, et al. Occlusal forces during chewing and swallowing as measured by sound transmission. J Prosthet Dent 1981;46(4):443–449. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(81)90455-8
  65. Tuğcu E, Vanlıoğlu B, Özkan YK, et al. Marginal adaptation and fracture resistance of lithium disilicate laminate veneers on teeth with different preparation depths. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2018;38(Suppl):s87–s95. DOI: 10.11607/prd.2995
  66. Magne P. Design optimization and evolution of bonded ceramics for the anterior dentition: a finite-element analysis. Quintessence Int 1999;30(10):661–672.
  67. Archegas LR, Freire A, Vieira S, et al. Colour stability and opacity of resin cements and flowable composites for ceramic veneer luting after accelerated ageing. J Dent 2011;39(11):804–810. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.08.013
  68. Stappert CFJ, Ozden U, Att W, et al. Marginal accuracy of press-ceramic veneers influenced by preparation design and fatigue. Am J Dent 2007;20(6):380–384.
  69. Alghazzawi TF, Lemons J, Liu PR, et al. The failure load of CAD/CAM generated zirconia and glass-ceramic laminate veneers with different preparation designs. J Prosthet Dent 2012;108(6):386–393. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60198-X
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.