A prospective comparative analysis of the survival rates of conventional vs no-prep/minimally invasive veneers over a mean period of 9 years

OBJECTIVES: The present study compares the survival rates of 186 conventional and no-prep/minimally invasive porcelain veneers in 35 patients over a mean period of 9 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The veneers were placed on the incisors, canines, and premolars in 35 patients between January 2009 and December 2010. Fourteen patients received 84 conventional veneers, and 21 patients received 102 no-prep/minimally invasive veneers. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after every 6 months until June 2019 based on modified United States Public Health Service criteria. The data was analyzed by using Wilcoxon–Breslow–Gehan and Taron–Ware tests. Kaplan–Meier survival and success curves were plotted for two groups of veneers. The results were compared by using the log rank test. A test probability of P < .05 was regarded as significant, while a test probability of P < .01 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: The mean survival rate, according to the Kaplan–Meier estimator, was 9.67% for conventional veneers and 100% for the no-prep or minimal prep veneers. A total of ten absolute failures were observed in six patients: eight restoration chipping/fractures, one debonding, and one fracturing of the tooth. Mean success rate time for conventional veneers without absolute or relative failures was 9.32 years, and 10.28 years for no-prep/minimally invasive veneers. CONCLUSIONS: Over a mean observation period of 9 years, the survival rate of no-prep/minimally invasive veneers exceed that of conventional veneers. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: No-prep/minimally invasive veneers appear very effective and should always be considered in certain clinical situations.