INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
“Facets of Beauty: Evidence-Based Guidelines for Porcelain  
Veneers in the Anterior Esthetic Zone”  
Dr R Sumukh Bharadwaj  
JSS Dental College Hospital  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2025.1410000149  
Abstract: Porcelain veneers represent a minimally invasive yet highly aesthetic treatment option for anterior teeth. Advances in  
ceramic materials, adhesive protocols, and digital workflows have significantly improved longevity and predictability. This  
narrative review outlines the indications, contraindications, material choices, preparation designs, adhesive cementation protocols,  
and complication management related to veneer therapy. Particular emphasis is placed on evidence-based decision-making and  
clinical nuances that influence long-term success, including case selection, occlusal planning, and periodontal considerations. The  
review also highlights methodological limitations in the current literature—such as heterogeneous follow-up periods, variable  
preparation designs, and differing adhesive strategies—that may affect interpretation of survival data. Comparative insights from  
long-term clinical trials and systematic reviews are integrated to provide balanced, clinically relevant guidelines.  
Keywords: porcelain veneers, ceramic laminates, minimally invasive dentistry, adhesive dentistry, esthetic dentistry  
I. Introduction  
The demand for esthetic dental treatment has grown substantially in recent decades, driven by increased patient expectations, social  
media exposure, and the normalization of cosmetic interventions. Porcelain veneers (ceramic laminate veneers) have become a  
cornerstone of smile enhancement due to their ability to mimic natural enamel, preserve tooth structure, and provide long-term  
color stability.¹,² Initially introduced in the 1930s as temporary facings for actors, veneer technology has evolved dramatically with  
the development of etchable ceramics, adhesive systems, and CAD/CAM technologies.³  
Despite their popularity, the success of veneers depends on careful diagnosis, treatment planning, appropriate material selection,  
and strict adherence to adhesive protocols.⁴ In addition, interpretation of the available evidence must account for variations in study  
design, follow-up duration, and outcome criteria, which may influence reported survival and complication rates. This manuscript  
provides an overview of contemporary evidence-based concepts for veneer therapy in dentistry, aimed at helping clinicians optimize  
functional and esthetic outcomes while critically appraising the strengths and limitations of the existing literature.  
Indications and Contraindications  
Indications  
Porcelain veneers are indicated in a variety of clinical situations:  
1. Discolorations  
o
o
Intrinsic stains (e.g., tetracycline staining, fluorosis, trauma-related discoloration) resistant to bleaching.⁵  
Discolored composite restorations or enamel defects such as hypoplasia or hypomineralization.  
2. Shape and Form Corrections  
o
o
Peg laterals, microdontia, tooth size discrepancies.⁶  
Diastema closure and minor positional corrections (to an extent).  
3. Minor Malposition and Wear  
o
Slight rotations or crowding that can be corrected by enameloplasty and veneer placement rather than orthodontics in selected  
cases.⁷  
o
Anterior tooth wear with sufficient enamel and stable occlusion.  
4. Esthetic Rehabilitation  
Smile design cases requiring modification of tooth proportions, midline alignment, or incisal edge position.⁸  
o
Contraindications  
Porcelain veneers are not ideal in the following scenarios:  
Insufficient Enamel  
Large dentin exposure, extensive existing restorations, or aggressive previous preparations reduce bonding predictability.⁹  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1258  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
Parafunction and Poor Occlusion  
Uncontrolled bruxism, deep overbite with heavy anterior contacts, or unstable occlusion can predispose to chipping and  
debonding.¹⁰  
Poor Oral Hygiene and Periodontal Health  
Active periodontal disease, high caries risk, or poor plaque control are relative contraindications until stabilized.¹¹  
Severely Malpositioned Teeth  
Cases better managed by orthodontics or orthognathic surgery rather than restorative camouflage.⁷  
Appropriate case selection remains the single most important determinant of success.⁴ Prospective studies consistently show higher  
survival rates when veneers are bonded predominantly to enamel and placed in patients with favorable occlusal and periodontal  
profiles.²⁹–³¹  
Clinical factor  
Indications  
Contraindications / Cautions  
Clinical notes  
Tooth  
Intrinsic stains resistant to Severe  
dark  
discoloration Consider internal bleaching first  
discoloration  
bleaching (e.g.,  
fluorosis, trauma).  
tetracycline, requiring excessive reduction for in endodontically treated teeth  
masking. when feasible.  
Enamel quality Adequate, intact enamel for Extensive dentin exposure; large Enamel-dominant bonding is  
and quantity  
bonding.  
composite  
restorations.  
or  
full-coverage associated with higher survival  
rates.  
Tooth shape and Peg laterals, microdontia, diastema Severe  
tooth  
size–arch Veneers  
requiring proportions  
can  
as  
harmonize  
form  
closure,  
minor  
tooth  
size discrepancy  
part  
of  
discrepancies.  
multidisciplinary treatment.  
comprehensive smile design.  
Tooth position  
Minor rotations, mild crowding, Severe malposition, crossbites, Consider  
orthodontics  
or  
slight labio-lingual discrepancies skeletal discrepancies.  
correctable by enameloplasty.  
orthognathic surgery instead of  
“camouflage” in complex cases.  
Occlusion and Stable occlusion with favorable Uncontrolled bruxism, deep Nightguard recommended in  
function  
guidance and controlled functional overbite with heavy anterior suspected parafunction; modify  
contacts.  
contacts.  
guidance where needed.  
Periodontal  
status  
Healthy  
plaque  
keratinized tissue.  
periodontium,  
control,  
good Active periodontal disease, poor Stabilize periodontal condition  
adequate hygiene, high caries risk.  
and caries risk before veneer  
therapy.  
Patient  
expectations  
Realistic esthetic expectations and Unrealistic expectations or desire Careful communication, mock-  
willingness for maintenance. for “instant orthodontics” in ups, and informed consent are  
complex cases. essential before treatment.  
Table 1. Indications and contraindications for porcelain veneers in the anterior esthetic zone  
Material Selection for Veneers  
Several ceramic materials are used for veneers, each with distinct optical and mechanical properties. Material choice should consider  
esthetics, strength, required masking ability, and available enamel substrate.  
Feldspathic Porcelain  
Traditionally considered the gold standard for veneers due to:  
Excellent translucency and enamel-like optical properties.¹²  
Ability to be layered and characterized by the ceramist.  
However, feldspathic ceramics are more brittle and require meticulous preparation design and occlusal planning.  
Leucite-Reinforced Glass Ceramics  
Leucite-reinforced ceramics (e.g., IPS Empress) exhibit:  
Improved flexural strength compared to feldspathic porcelain.  
Good translucency and etchability, allowing strong bonding.¹³  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1259  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
They are suitable for veneers needing slightly higher strength but still high esthetics.  
Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics  
Lithium disilicate (e.g., IPS e.max Press/CAD) has gained popularity because it offers:  
High flexural strength (approx. 360–400 MPa).¹⁴  
Good esthetics, with varying translucency levels (HT, MT, LT).  
These ceramics are especially useful in cases with moderate discoloration or when slightly more robust restorations are desired.¹⁴  
Comparative clinical studies suggest similar survival for feldspathic and lithium disilicate veneers in enamel-bonded cases, but  
lithium disilicate may show fewer catastrophic fractures in higher-stress situations.²⁹–³¹  
CAD/CAM and Milled Veneers  
Digital workflows allow chairside or lab-based CAD/CAM veneers from lithium disilicate or hybrid ceramics:  
Reduced turnaround times.  
Standardized, reproducible restorations.  
Potential for minimally invasive or even non-prep veneers in selected cases.¹⁵  
Material choice should balance esthetics, strength, and required masking ability, guided by the specific clinical situation and  
supported by laboratory and clinical data.⁴  
Material  
Flexural  
strength  
(approx.)  
Optical  
properties  
Minimal  
thickness  
(approx.)  
Indications  
Limitations  
Feldspathic porcelain  
60–100 MPa Excellent  
translucency,  
~0.3–0.5 mm  
~0.5–0.7 mm  
Highly  
esthetic More  
brittle;  
anterior veneers with technique-sensitive;  
good enamel support requires  
enamel-like;  
highly  
customizable  
careful  
occlusal planning.  
Leucite-reinforced  
glass ceramic  
120–180  
MPa  
Good  
translucency and  
esthetics  
Anterior  
requiring  
higher strength  
veneers Limited indication  
slightly in high-stress or  
heavy-load  
situations.  
Lithium  
glass ceramic  
disilicate 360–400  
MPa  
Good esthetics; ~0.3–0.6  
mm Anterior  
moderate  
veneers, May appear slightly  
more opaque in  
multiple  
(per  
translucency  
options (HT, MT,  
LT)  
shade/masking)  
discoloration,  
increased strength  
high-opacity ingots  
for masking.  
CAD/CAM  
ceramics/composites  
hybrid 120–200  
Esthetic; elastic ~0.5–1.0 mm  
modulus closer to  
dentin  
Chairside veneers, Limited long-term  
minimally invasive data versus  
MPa  
(variable)  
restorations  
conventional glass  
ceramics.  
Ultralight  
veneer ceramics  
/
no-prep 150–400  
Highly  
translucent in thin  
sections  
~0.2–0.3 mm  
No-prep or minimal- Cannot mask severe  
prep veneers in ideal discoloration;  
MPa  
(material-  
dependent)  
alignment/shade  
indication-sensitive;  
very  
case-  
dependent.  
Table 2. Comparison of ceramic materials for porcelain veneers  
Diagnostic Phase and Smile Design  
Comprehensive Assessment  
A structured diagnostic approach includes:  
Detailed history and chief complaint.  
Photographic documentation (extraoral and intraoral).  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1260  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
Study models or digital scans.  
Radiographic evaluation to rule out pathology and assess existing restorations.¹⁶  
Esthetic Analysis  
Esthetic analysis involves evaluation of:  
Facial esthetics (midline, interpupillary line, facial symmetry).  
Dental esthetics (incisal display at rest, smile line, buccal corridor).  
Tooth proportions (width/height ratio, golden proportion as a guide, not a rule).⁸,¹⁷  
Digital smile design (DSD) tools can enhance communication with patients and the lab and allow simulation of treatment  
outcomes.¹⁸  
Wax-Up and Mock-Up  
A diagnostic wax-up translates the esthetic plan into three dimensions. From this, a silicone index is fabricated to create an intraoral  
mock-up using bis-acryl or flowable composite.¹⁹  
The mock-up allows:  
Evaluation of esthetics, phonetics, and functional aspects.  
Minimally invasive preparation guided by the planned final form (“prep through the mock-up”).²⁰  
Tooth Preparation Principles  
Minimally Invasive Philosophy  
Veneers should ideally remain within enamel to maximize bonding strength.⁹,²¹ The amount of reduction is dictated by:  
Initial tooth position.  
Desired final contour and shade (masking requirements).  
Material thickness recommendations.  
Reduction Guidelines  
Typical reduction values (may vary by case and material):  
Facial reduction: 0.3–0.5 mm in cervical third, 0.5–0.7 mm in middle third, and up to 0.7–1.0 mm in incisal third.²¹  
Incisal edge:  
o
o
No-prep/non-prep in specific cases.  
Incisal overlap design (1.0–2.0 mm) often preferred for enhanced mechanical performance and esthetics.²²  
Proximal reduction: Enough to hide margins and create space while preserving contact when possible.  
Depth-cutting burs and preparation guides from the mock-up help maintain uniform reduction and prevent over-preparation.²⁰  
Margin Design  
Common margin designs:  
Light chamfer or butt joint at the cervical margin.  
Supragingival margins preferred for periodontal health and easier bonding/cleanup when esthetics allow.²³  
Slightly subgingival placement may be required in cases of discoloration or short clinical crowns, but care must be taken to  
respect the biologic width.¹¹  
Impression Techniques and Provisionalization  
Impression / Digital Scanning  
Conventional impressions:  
High-precision elastomeric materials (polyvinyl siloxane or polyether), with careful gingival retraction where necessary.²⁴  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1261  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
Digital impressions:  
Intraoral scanners provide accurate data, improved patient comfort, and seamless integration with CAD/CAM workflows.¹⁵  
Parameter  
Conventional impressions (PVS / polyether) Digital impressions (intraoral scanners)  
Accuracy  
High, well-documented; depends on tray High; comparable or superior for short-span  
selection and technique  
restorations  
Soft  
tissue Often requires physical retraction cord and Still requires soft tissue control, but avoids tray  
management  
hemostatic agents distortion  
Patient comfort  
Lower (gag reflex, taste of materials, tray bulk) Higher; no impression material, shorter data capture  
time  
Workflow  
integration  
Analog workflow; stone models, physical Direct integration with CAD/CAM, digital wax-ups,  
shipping to lab  
and virtual planning  
Turnaround time  
Reproducibility  
Learning curve  
Longer; reliant on lab logistics and transport  
Potentially shorter; chairside or streamlined digital  
communication  
Remakes require a new physical impression  
Familiar to most clinicians  
Data can be stored, duplicated, or resent without  
reimpression  
Requires training and investment in scanner  
hardware/software  
Table 3. Conventional versus digital impressions for porcelain veneers  
Provisional Veneers  
Provisional restorations can be fabricated from the diagnostic mock-up using:  
Spot-etch technique and bis-acryl materials.  
Indirect provisionals in more extensive cases.  
They allow evaluation of esthetics, phonetics, and soft tissue response, and can be adjusted prior to final fabrication.¹⁹  
Adhesive Cementation Protocol  
The ultimate success of veneers is determined largely by the bonding protocol.⁴,²¹  
1. Try-In  
Check fit, marginal adaptation, and contacts with glycerin-based try-in pastes shade-matched to the resin cement.²⁵  
Evaluate esthetics in natural and operatory light.  
Obtain patient approval before final bonding.  
2. Surface Treatment of Ceramic  
For etchable glass ceramics (feldspathic, leucite-reinforced, lithium disilicate):  
1. Etch internal surface with 5–10% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for manufacturer-recommended time (e.g., ~20 s for feldspathic,  
leucite-reinforced, and lithium disilicate; always check IFU).¹³,¹⁴  
2. Thoroughly rinse and dry.  
3. Apply silane coupling agent and air dry.²⁶  
4. Apply a thin layer of adhesive (without curing) or as per manufacturer’s recommendation.  
3. Tooth Surface Treatment  
Protocols depend on substrate:  
Enamel-dominant substrate:  
o
o
o
30–37% phosphoric acid etching for 15–30 s.  
Rinse and dry to a frosty appearance.  
Apply adhesive and gently air-thin; cure if required by system.²¹  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1262  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
Mixed enamel–dentin or dentin-exposed areas:  
o
o
Total-etch or selective-etch protocol with an etch-and-rinse or universal adhesive according to manufacturer instructions.²⁷  
Avoid over-drying dentin (maintain slight moistness).  
4. Resin Cementation  
Use light-cure or dual-cure resin cement; light-cure is typically preferred for veneers due to better color stability and extended  
working time.²⁸  
Place cement inside the veneer, seat gently, and apply uniform pressure.  
Remove gross excess with a brush or micro-brush before polymerization.  
Tack cure marginally (2–3 s) to facilitate removal of remaining excess with an explorer or scaler.²⁵  
Apply glycerin gel along margins to prevent an oxygen-inhibited layer, then perform final light curing from multiple aspects.²⁵  
5. Finishing and Polishing  
Refine margins with fine diamond burs and polishing discs.  
Use silicone polishers and polishing pastes to achieve high gloss.²¹  
Occlusal Considerations  
Proper occlusal planning is critical for veneer longevity:  
Ensure even contact distribution in centric occlusion.  
Avoid heavy functional contacts on fragile incisal edges or ceramic margins.²²  
Aim for shared guidance or canine guidance; undesirable protrusive interferences should be removed.¹⁰  
Consider a nighttime occlusal splint for patients with parafunctional habits, after informing them about the risk of fracture.¹⁰  
Long-term prospective data suggest that parafunction and unfavorable guidance patterns significantly increase failure rates, even  
when materials and bonding protocols are optimal.²⁹–³¹  
Longevity and Clinical Performance  
Long-term studies report high survival rates for porcelain veneers when placed under correct conditions:  
Survival rates of 91–95% at 10 years and approximately 83–94% at 15 years have been documented.²⁹–³¹  
Main causes of failure include fracture, debonding, secondary caries, and marginal discoloration.²⁹  
Risk factors for failure:  
Predominant bonding to dentin rather than enamel.⁹  
Bruxism and heavy occlusal loads.¹⁰  
Inadequate preparation design and insufficient thickness of ceramic.²²  
Poor moisture control and compromised bonding procedures.  
Comparative analyses between feldspathic and lithium disilicate veneers indicate broadly similar overall survival, but differences  
in modes of failure (more cohesive ceramic fractures vs debonding) depending on preparation design and substrate.²⁹–³¹ Systematic  
reviews also emphasize heterogeneity in inclusion criteria, follow-up times, and outcome definitions as important methodological  
limitations when interpreting survival percentages.  
Regular follow-up with professional maintenance (polishing, plaque control, and minor adjustments) is essential to prolong veneer  
life.³²  
Complications and Their Management  
Fracture and Chipping  
Small chips can often be repaired intraorally with composite resin after surface roughening and silanization.³³  
Larger fractures may require veneer replacement, ideally with reassessment of occlusal contacts and substrate quality.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1263  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
Debonding  
May result from contamination during bonding, inadequate enamel substrate, or occlusal trauma.⁹  
Management includes assessing underlying tooth structure, rebonding if feasible, or remaking with improved design and  
bonding protocol.  
Marginal Discoloration  
Often related to microleakage or aging of resin cement.²⁸  
Minor discoloration can sometimes be polished or masked; significant leakage may require replacement.  
Biological Complications  
Gingival inflammation due to over-contoured restorations or subgingival excess cement.¹¹  
Management includes improving hygiene, careful removal of excess cement, and contour adjustments.  
Digital Veneers and Emerging Trends  
CAD/CAM technology and digital smile design are reshaping veneer workflows:  
Fully digital workflows enable scanning, virtual design, and milling of veneers with fewer clinical steps.¹⁵,¹⁸  
3D printing diagnostic models and mock-ups enhances communication and predictability.  
Minimally invasive or no-prep veneers using high-strength, thin ceramics are increasingly popular in carefully selected cases,  
though they require precise indication and patient education regarding limitations.³⁴  
Emerging research focuses on ultra-translucent ceramics with higher strength, bioactive or self-adhesive interfaces, and AI-assisted  
esthetic planning and outcome prediction. However, many of these innovations are supported by short- to medium-term data and  
in vitro studies; robust long-term clinical trials are still limited, representing an important area for future research.  
Limitations of the Current Evidence  
The current body of literature on porcelain veneers, while extensive, presents several methodological limitations:  
Many clinical studies are retrospective and conducted in specialized centers, which may introduce selection bias and limit  
generalizability.  
Follow-up periods vary widely, and not all studies report standardized criteria for success, survival, and failure, complicating  
meaningful comparison of outcomes.²⁹–³¹  
Differences in preparation design, substrate (enamel vs dentin), adhesive system, and cement type are often not controlled  
across cohorts.⁹,²¹,²⁷  
Newer materials and digital workflows frequently have short-term follow-up, relying heavily on in vitro data or case  
series.¹⁴,¹⁵,³⁴  
Clinicians should interpret survival rates and complication frequencies in light of these limitations and apply evidence cautiously,  
integrating clinical experience and individual patient factors into decision-making.  
II. Conclusion  
Porcelain veneers, when used appropriately, offer a powerful combination of minimally invasive treatment and superior esthetics.  
Successful veneer therapy is anchored in meticulous diagnosis, careful case selection, enamel-focused preparation, evidence-based  
adhesive protocols, and thoughtful occlusal design. Long-term clinical data demonstrate high survival rates, particularly when  
veneers are bonded predominantly to enamel and placed in patients with favorable occlusal and periodontal conditions.²⁹–³²  
At the same time, interpretation of veneer performance must account for methodological limitations in the literature, such as  
heterogeneous study designs, variable follow-up durations, and evolving materials and techniques. Emerging digital workflows and  
advanced ceramics further expand treatment possibilities but require continued critical appraisal and long-term evaluation.  
Clinicians must remain updated on material science and adhesive strategies, adopt a minimally invasive and biologically respectful  
approach, and communicate realistically with patients about benefits, limitations, and maintenance requirements. When these  
principles are followed, porcelain veneers can provide predictable, durable, and highly satisfying outcomes in the anterior esthetic  
zone.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1264  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025  
References (Vancouver Style)  
1. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Porcelain veneers: a review of the literature. J Dent.  
2000;28(3):163-77.  
2. Radz GM. Minimum thickness anterior porcelain restorations. Dent Clin North Am. 2011;55(2):353-70.  
3. Calamia JR. Etched porcelain veneers: the current state of the art. Quintessence Int. 1985;16(1):5-12.  
4. Gresnigt MMM, Özcan M. Esthetic rehabilitation of anterior teeth with porcelain laminates and minimally invasive  
preparations. Eur J Esthet Dent. 2011;6(3):298-313.  
5. Friedman MJ. Porcelain veneer restorations: a clinician’s opinion about a disturbing trend. J Esthet Restor Dent.  
2001;13(5):318-27.  
6. Meijering AC, Creugers NHJ, Roeters FJM, Mulder J. Survival of three types of veneer restorations in a clinical trial: a  
2.5-year interim evaluation. J Dent. 1998;26(7):563-8.  
7. Magne P, Belser UC. Bonded porcelain restorations in the anterior dentition: a biomimetic approach. Chicago:  
Quintessence; 2002.  
8. Coachman C, Calamita MA. Digital smile design: a tool for treatment planning and communication in esthetic dentistry.  
Quintessence Dent Technol. 2012;35:103-11.  
9. Stappert CFJ, Ozden U, Gerds T, Strub JR. Longevity and failure load of ceramic veneers with different preparation designs  
after exposure to masticatory simulation. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94(2):132-9.  
10. Layton DM, Walton TR. The up to 21-year clinical outcome and survival of feldspathic porcelain veneers: a prospective  
study. J Dent. 2007;35(8):608-15.  
11. Kois JC. Altering gingival levels: the restorative connection. Part I: Biologic variables. J Esthet Dent. 1994;6(1):3-9.  
12. Dumfahrt H. Porcelain laminate veneers. A retrospective evaluation after 1 to 10 years of service: Part II—Clinical results.  
Int J Prosthodont. 1999;12(6):483-9.  
13. Fradeani M. Esthetic rehabilitation in fixed prosthodontics: Volume 2. Chicago: Quintessence; 2008.  
14. Guess PC, Schultheis S, Bonfante EA, Coelho PG, Ferencz JL, Silva NRFA. All-ceramic systems: laboratory and clinical  
performance. Dent Clin North Am. 2011;55(2):333-52.  
15. Güth JF, Edelhoff D, Schweiger J, Keul C. Anew method for the evaluation of the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions  
in vitro. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(7):1487-94.  
16. Sarver DM, Ackerman MB. Orthodontics about face: the re-emergence of the esthetic paradigm. Am J Orthod Dentofacial  
Orthop. 2000;117(5):575-6.  
17. Lombardi RE. The principles of visual perception and their clinical application to denture esthetics. J Prosthet Dent.  
1973;29(4):358-82.  
18. Coachman C, Paravina RD. Digitally enhanced esthetic dentistry—From treatment planning to quality control. J Esthet  
Restor Dent. 2016;28 Suppl 1:S3-4.  
19. Gurel G. The science and art of porcelain laminate veneers. Chicago: Quintessence; 2003.  
20. Gurel G, Sesma N, Calamita MA, Coachman C, Morimoto S. Influence of enamel preservation on failure rates of porcelain  
laminate veneers. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013;33(1):31-9.  
21. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to  
enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28(3):215-35.  
22. Magne P, Hanna J, Magne M. The case for moderate “guided prep” veneers in the anterior dentition: biomimetic  
reconstructive dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2013;25(6):383-94.  
23. Reynolds JM. Periodontal considerations in restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 1975;33(5):531-8.  
24. Mandikos MN. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: an update on clinical use. Aust Dent J. 1998;43(6):428-34.  
25. Dietschi D, Devigus A. Prefabricated composite veneers: historical perspectives, indications and clinical application. Eur  
J Esthet Dent. 2011;6(2):178-87.  
26. Lung CYK, Matinlinna JP. Aspects of silane coupling agents and surface conditioning in dentistry: an overview. Dent  
Mater. 2012;28(5):467-77.  
27. Perdigão J. New developments in dental adhesion. Dent Clin North Am. 2007;51(2):333-57.  
28. Koizumi H, Saiki O, Nogawa H, Hiraba H, Okazaki T, Yoneyama T. Color stability of dual-cured resin cements after  
immersion in coffee. J Prosthodont Res. 2010;54(3):178-83.  
29. Beier US, Kapferer I, Burtscher D, Dumfahrt H. Clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers for up to 20 years. Int  
J Prosthodont. 2012;25(1):79-85.  
30. Layton DM, Clarke M, Walton TR. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the survival of feldspathic porcelain veneers  
over 5 and 10 years. Int J Prosthodont. 2012;25(6):590-603.  
31. Fradeani M, Redemagni M, Corrado M. Porcelain laminate veneers: 6- to 12-year clinical evaluation—a retrospective  
study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005;25(1):9-17.  
32. Radz GM. Veneer survival and maintenance. Dent Clin North Am. 2011;55(2):379-90.  
33. Ozcan M, Niedermeier W. Clinical study on the reasons for and location of failures of metal-ceramic restorations and  
survival of repairs. Int J Prosthodont. 2002;15(3):299-302.  
34. Chu SJ, Karabudak F, Maller S, Salama MA, Garber DA. Clinical considerations for minimally invasive esthetic treatment  
with porcelain veneers. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2007;19(9):561-8.  
www.ijltemas.in  
Page 1265