Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 6, 2025
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Three-dimensional Quantification of Enamel Preservation in Tooth Preparation for Porcelain Laminate Veneers: A Fully
1Jing Gao, DDS, MSc, PhD, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Disease, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China.
Objective:
This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the preservation of enamel after tooth preparation for porcelain laminate veneers (PLVs) at different preparation depths based on a fully digital workflow.
Methods And Materials:
Sixty extracted human maxillary anterior teeth, including 20 maxillary central incisors (MCIs), 20 maxillary lateral incisors (MLIs), and 20 maxillary canines (MCs) underwent microcomputed tomography (CT) scanning, and were reconstructed as three-dimensional (3D) enamel and dentin models. Subsequently, the three-dimensional (3D) enamel models were imported into Materialise, where each enamel model underwent seven types of virtual preparation for PLVs at preparation depths at 0.1-mm increments from 0.1-0.3-0.5 mm (D1) to 0.7-0.9-1.1 mm (D7). The enamel surface was depicted by merging the virtual preparation and, respective, dentin models. The enamel area and prepared surface were measured to calculate the percentage of enamel (R%). The data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) (α=0.05).
Results:
The group-wise mean (standard deviation) R values for the MCIs were as follows: D1-D3: 100.00 (0) each, and D4-D7: 74.70 (2.45), 51.40 (5.12), 24.40 (3.06), and 0.00 (0), respectively. The group-wise mean R values for the MLIs were 100.00 (0), 73.70 (3.40), 53.50 (3.44), 25.20 (3.79), and 0.90 (0.99) for the D1-D5 groups, respectively; and 0.00 (0) each for the D6-D7 groups. The group-wise mean (standard deviations) R values for the MCs were as follows: D1-D3: 100.00 (0) each, and D4-D7: 99.00 (1.34), 77.10 (3.28), 74.20 (3.61), and 52.20 (4.09), respectively. The one-way ANOVA revealed significant differences between the seven groups in the MCIs, MLIs, and MCs (p<0.05).
Conclusions:
Our results recommended preparation depths of up to 0.3-0.5-0.7 mm (MCIs), 0.1-0.3-0.5 mm (MLIs), and 0.4-0.6-0.8 mm (MCs) to facilitate complete intraenamel preparation. Moreover, 50% enamel was preserved at preparation depths of 0.5-0.7-0.9 mm (MCIs), 0.3-0.5-0.7 mm (MLIs), and 0.7-0.9-1.1 mm (MCs).
