Publication

Abstract : 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.