Alghazzawi Tariq F
Department of Substitutive Dental Sciences, Taibah University, Madinah 42353, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.
J Funct Biomater. 2024 May 16;15(5):131. doi: 10.3390/jfb15050131.
There is a vast amount of published literature concerning dental veneers; however, the effects of tooth preparation, aging, veneer type, and resin cement type on the failure of dental veneers in laboratory versus clinical scenarios are not clear. The purpose of the present narrative review was to determine the principal factors associated with failures of dental veneers in laboratory tests and to understand how these factors translate into clinical successes/failures. Articles were identified and screened by the lead author in January 2024 using the keywords ''dental veneer", "complication", "survival rate", "failure", and "success rate" using PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Science Direct. The inclusion criteria included articles published between January 1999 and January 2024 on the topics of preparation of a tooth, aging processes of the resin cement and veneer, translucency, thickness, fabrication technique of the veneer; shade, and thickness of the resin cement. The exclusion criteria included articles that discussed marginal and internal fit, microhardness, water sorption, solubility, polishability, occlusal veneers, retention, surface treatments, and wear. The results of the present review indicated that dental veneers generally have a high survival rate (>90% for more than 10 years). The amount of preserved enamel layer plays a paramount role in the survival and success rates of veneers, and glass-ceramic veneers with minimal/no preparation showed the highest survival rates. Fracture was the primary failure mechanism associated with decreased survival rate, followed by debonding and color change. Fractures increased in the presence of parafunctional activities. Fewer endodontic complications were associated with veneer restorations. No difference was observed between the maxillary and mandibular teeth. Fractures can be reduced by evaluation of occlusion immediately after cementation and through the use of high-strength veneer materials, resin cements with low moduli, and thin layers of highly polished veneers. Debonding failures can be reduced with minimal/no preparation, and immediate dentin sealing should be considered when dentin is exposed. Debonding can also be reduced by preventing contamination from blood, saliva, handpiece oil, or fluoride-containing polishing paste; through proper surface treatment (20 s of hydrofluoric acid etching for glass ceramic followed by silane for 60 s); and through use of light-cured polymerization for thin veneers. Long-term color stability may be maintained using resin cements with UDMA-based resin, glass ceramic materials, and light-cure polymerization with thin veneers.
有大量关于牙贴面的已发表文献;然而,在实验室与临床场景中,牙齿预备、老化、贴面类型和树脂水门汀类型对牙贴面失败的影响尚不清楚。本叙述性综述的目的是确定在实验室测试中与牙贴面失败相关的主要因素,并了解这些因素如何转化为临床成功/失败。2024年1月,第一作者使用关键词“牙贴面”“并发症”“生存率”“失败”和“成功率”,通过PubMed/Medline、Scopus、谷歌学术和科学Direct数据库检索并筛选文章。纳入标准包括1999年1月至2024年1月期间发表的关于牙齿预备、树脂水门汀和贴面的老化过程、半透明度、厚度、贴面制作技术、色泽以及树脂水门汀厚度等主题的文章。排除标准包括讨论边缘和内部贴合、显微硬度、吸水性、溶解性、可抛光性、咬合贴面、固位、表面处理和磨损的文章。本综述结果表明,牙贴面总体生存率较高(超过10年的生存率>90%)。保留的釉质层数量对贴面的生存率和成功率起着至关重要的作用,最小化预备或无需预备的玻璃陶瓷贴面显示出最高的生存率。折裂是与生存率降低相关的主要失败机制,其次是脱粘和颜色改变。在存在副功能活动时,折裂增加。与贴面修复相关的牙髓并发症较少。上颌牙和下颌牙之间未观察到差异。通过粘结后立即评估咬合以及使用高强度贴面材料、低模量树脂水门汀和高度抛光的薄层贴面,可以减少折裂。通过最小化预备或无需预备,并在牙本质暴露时考虑立即进行牙本质封闭,可以减少脱粘失败。还可以通过防止血液、唾液、手机油或含氟抛光膏的污染;通过适当的表面处理(玻璃陶瓷用氢氟酸蚀刻20秒,然后用硅烷处理60秒);以及对薄层贴面使用光固化聚合来减少脱粘。使用含UDMA基树脂的树脂水门汀、玻璃陶瓷材料以及对薄层贴面进行光固化聚合,可以维持长期的颜色稳定性。