Journal of Prevention and Treatment for Stomatological Diseases ›› 2016, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (9): 528-533.DOI: 10.12016/j.issn.2096-1456.2016.09.007

• Cinical Study • Previous Articles     Next Articles

A clinical research on thin porcelain laminate veneer and conventional porcelain laminate veneer

ZUO Chen-qi,WEI Li-Ping,LÜ Jie,TANG You-chao,WANG Yuan-qin()   

  1. Department of Prosthodontics, the Affiliated Huizhou Stomatological Hospital of Medical College of Jinan University & Huizhou Stomatological Hospital, Huizhou 516001, China
  • Received:2016-03-21 Revised:2016-06-05 Online:2016-09-20 Published:2016-09-20
  • Contact: Yuan-qin WANG



  1. 暨南大学医学院附属惠州口腔医院·惠州口腔医院修复科,广东 惠州(516001)
  • 通讯作者: 王远勤
  • 作者简介:左陈启,主治医师,硕士,
  • 基金资助:


Objective To compare the clinical results of thin porcelain laminate veneer and conventional porcelain laminate veneer.Methods 20 patients were restored with 72 thin porcelain laminate veneers, and 45 patients were restored with 120 conventional porcelain laminate veneers. Clinical reevaluations were performed 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months after insertion of the veneers according to the modified USPHS-criteria. Survival-rate and success-rate were recorded.Results After an observation period up to 3 years, thin porcelain laminate veneers and conventional porcelain laminate veneers showed good clinical results in terms of secondary caries, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, color match and anatomic form. Both the survival-rate and success-rate were above 90%, and no significant differences were found between the 2 veneer groups with the correction for continuity Pearson 's χ 2 test (P > 0.05).Conclusion Thin porcelain laminate veneer could obtain the same clinical results as conventional porcelain laminate veneer, however the indications should be selected properly and a higher level of operation technique is also required. A long period of clinical results remains to be observed.

Key words: Thin porcelain laminate veneer, Conventional porcelain laminate veneer, Survival rate, Success rate, Aesthetic restoration


目的 比较超薄贴面与常规贴面的临床效果,为超薄贴面的临床应用提供依据。方法 选取超薄贴面20例与常规贴面修复患者45例,基牙分别为72、120颗,3、6、12、24、36个月后随访,依据改良美国公共卫生署贴面评价分类标准进行临床效果对比研究,统计留存率和成功率。结果 经过3年观察,超薄贴面和常规贴面在继发龋、边缘适合性、边缘变色、颜色适合性和结构形态方面均有较好的临床表现,留存率及成功率均大于90%,经连续性校正卡方检验差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。结论 超薄贴面可以获得与常规贴面相近的临床效果。

关键词: 超薄贴面, 常规贴面, 留存率, 成功率, 美学修复

CLC Number: