A Narrative Review on the Survival and Success Rates of Veneers in Contemporary Dentistry

Page Start

409

Page End

420

D.O.I.

10.1922/EJPRD_2865Sholji12

• Christos Theocharides
• Anas Aaqel Salim
• Cima Abdel Sater
• Mariamina Papasotiriou
• Farah Sholji

Abstract

European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry (2025) 33, 409–420

Keywords
Zirconia
Ceramic
Literature Review
Resin Composite
Preparation Designs

Authors
Farah Sholji *
(BDS)

Mariamina Papasotiriou *
(BDS)

Cima Abdel Sater *
(BDS)

Anas Aaqel Salim §
(DDS, MSc, PhD)

Christos Theocharides ‡

(BDS, BSc, MFDS RCSEd, MClinDent Pros,
MPros RCSEd)

Address for Correspondence
Mariamina Papasotiriou *
Email: [email protected]
* Department of Dentistry, European University
Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
§

‡

Assistant Professor of Operative Dentistry,
Department of Dentistry, European University
Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
Lecturer of Prosthodontics, Department of
Dentistry, European University Cyprus, Nicosia,
Cyprus

Received: 08.12.2024
Accepted: 13.08.2025
doi: 10.1922/EJPRD_2865Sholji12

A Narrative Review on the
Survival and Success Rates
of Veneers in Contemporary
Dentistry
ABSTRACT
Objective: This study aims to investigate the survival and success rates of dental veneers based on different material types and preparation designs. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria limited articles to English language published in the last 27 years, resulting in 63 studies. Results:
Veneers with minimal preparation designs showed higher survival rates than extensive
preparation. Incisal overlap re-establishes anterior guidance, distributing occlusal forces
with the most predictable outcomes. Survival and success rates range based on material
type and preparation design. Ceramic veneers demonstrated the highest survival and
success rates, followed by composite veneers. Indirect composite veneers showed higher
survival and success rates than direct composite veneers. Conclusion: Scientific evidence
favors minimal preparation designs for better survival rates, with clinician preference
guiding design choice. Ceramic veneers consistently demonstrated higher survival and
success rates than composite veneers, with both remaining viable options. Indirect composite veneers exhibited higher survival and success rates than direct composite veneers.
Decision-making should consider patient needs, operator experience, and restoration longevity goals. Clinical Significance: Selecting an effective and durable prosthodontic treatment is essential in dental practice. Ceramic veneers with minimal preparation design
emerged as the most preferable material.

INTRODUCTION
Dental veneers are thin, tooth-colored restorations bonded to the facial
surfaces of anterior teeth to enhance aesthetics and restore form and
function.1 As patient demand for aesthetic yet conservative treatments
continues to rise, veneers have become a cornerstone of contemporary
restorative dentistry, offering minimally invasive solutions with high patient satisfaction and predictable outcomes.
Veneers are indicated in a variety of clinical situations, including discoloration (such as tetracycline staining, fluorosis, or amelogenesis imperfecta), worn, damaged or fractured teeth, abnormal tooth morphology,
minor malpositions, and intraoral repairs of fractured crowns or bridges.2,3 Relative contraindications include parafunctional habits, edge-toedge occlusion, poor oral hygiene, and insufficient enamel.2,3 However,
these are not absolute, and must be considered within the context of
individual case planning. Poor oral hygiene, while a concern, should not
categorically preclude veneer placement. Rather, it highlights the need
for appropriate pre-restorative intervention to stabilize the periodontium

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

EJPRD