Purpose: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis based on clinical trials that evaluated the main outcomes of glass-ceramic and feldspathic porcelain laminate veneers.
Materials and methods: A systematic search was carried out in Cochrane and PubMed databases. From the selected studies, the survival rates for porcelain and glass-ceramic veneers were extracted, as were complication rates of clinical outcomes: debonding, fracture/chipping, secondary caries, endodontic problems, severe marginal discoloration, and influence of incisal coverage and enamel/dentin preparation. The Cochran Q test and the I(2) statistic were used to evaluate heterogeneity.
Results: Out of the 899 articles initially identified, 13 were included for analysis. Metaregression analysis showed that the types of ceramics and follow-up periods had no influence on failure rate. The estimated overall cumulative survival rate was 89% (95% CI: 84% to 94%) in a median follow-up period of 9 years. The estimated survival for glass-ceramic was 94% (95% CI: 87% to 100%), and for feldspathic porcelain veneers, 87% (95% CI: 82% to 93%). The meta-analysis showed rates for the following events: debonding: 2% (95% CI: 1% to 4%); fracture/chipping: 4% (95% CI: 3% to 6%); secondary caries: 1% (95% CI: 0% to 3%); severe marginal discoloration: 2% (95% CI: 1% to 10%); endodontic problems: 2% (95% CI: 1% to 3%); and incisal coverage odds ratio: 1.25 (95% CI: 0.33 to 4.73). It was not possible to perform meta-analysis of the influence of enamel/dentin preparation on failure rates.
Conclusion: Glass-ceramic and porcelain laminate veneers have high survival rates. Fracture/ chipping was the most frequent complication, providing evidence that ceramic veneers are a safe treatment option that preserve tooth structure.