Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1111/jerd.70077

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/jerd.70077
suck pdf from google scholar
41391014!?!41391014

suck abstract from ncbi

pmid41391014      J+Esthet+Restor+Dent 2025 ; ? (?): ?
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Clinical Performance Comparison of Prepless and Minimally Invasive Ceramic Laminate Veneer Restorations: A Prospective Clinical Study #MMPMID41391014
  • Yilmaz S; Demirkol N; Eyuboglu TF; Ozcan M
  • J Esthet Restor Dent 2025[Dec]; ? (?): ? PMID41391014show ga
  • INTRODUCTION: Ceramic laminate veneers (CLVs) play a vital role in esthetic dentistry; however, the impact of preparation design on clinical outcomes remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVES: This prospective clinical study evaluated the clinical success of CLV restorations fabricated with different preparation techniques. METHODS: CLVs (N = 110; 55 minimally invasive, 55 prepless) were placed in 12 patients (7 female and 5 male). After 1 year, restorations were assessed via United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Chewing pressure was measured; restorations were checked for fractures, cracks, or debonding. Periodontal health was evaluated by probing depths; patient satisfaction was recorded using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Statistical analysis used chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests (p < 0.05). RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in adaptation, color, form, or roughness (p > 0.05). Fractures were observed in 0% and 9.1% (n = 5), debonding in 0% and 1.8% (n = 1), and cracks in 3.6% (n = 2) and 0% of the minimally invasive and prepless groups, respectively. Fracture incidence differed significantly (p = 0.022). Chewing force showed no correlation with complications. Pocket depth changes were nonsignificant, and patient satisfaction was higher in the prepless group (median VAS = 10) than in the minimally invasive group (median = 9; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Preparation type did not significantly affect esthetic or periodontal outcomes after 1 year. Complications were more common in prepless veneers, suggesting minimal prep might improve stability. Chewing forces did not significantly impact performance, indicating functional loads do not damage veneers. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Both minimally invasive and prepless CLVs yield positive short-term outcomes. Yet, proper case selection and occlusal management are essential to prevent complications and secure long-term success.
  • ?


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box