Cosmetic Dentistry on an Unstable Foundation

TMJ Screening, Tooth Wear, Condylar Position, and Functional Risk Before Anterior Restoration

Oct 28, 2026 · @Agatha Bis

Introduction

Why do cosmetic cases that look correct on the day of insertion fail in function?

Cosmetic dentistry is taught through preparation design, adhesive protocol, ceramic selection, shade, contour, and emergence profile. These factors matter. A poorly bonded veneer will fail. An unsupported ceramic will fracture. Contaminated adhesive interfaces and insufficient enamel compromise an otherwise correct result.

One determinant of long-term success is usually evaluated only after the restorations are inserted: function.

Veneers and anterior crowns change more than colour and shape. They change incisal edge position, anterior guidance, overbite, overjet, contact timing, and the path the mandible takes to close. They change where the mandible stops. Where the mandible stops determines where the condyle seats.

In a stable masticatory system, these changes are tolerated. In a patient already functioning at the limit of adaptation, a small restorative change exposes a problem that was previously compensated for.

The principle of this article is simple. Do not evaluate the restoration before you evaluate the system the restoration will function in.

1. Esthetic Success and Functional Success Are Different Outcomes

A veneer can remain bonded and still function poorly. A ceramic fracture can reflect a material flaw, excessive parafunctional load, unfavourable guidance, insufficient thickness, an occlusal interference, or several of these together.

Ceramic veneers show high survival when they are planned and bonded correctly [22]. Failures still occur as fracture, chipping, debonding, marginal discolouration, and secondary caries. A meta-analysis of sleep bruxism and ceramic restoration failure found no overall association across all ceramic restorations. The exception was the anterior ceramic veneer, which showed increased odds of failure in bruxing patients [21]. The anterior veneer is the restoration that carries guidance and excursive load.

Every cosmetic case therefore carries two sets of risk.

A predictable case addresses both columns. Most cosmetic training addresses only the first.

Table 1. Restorative failures and the functional question behind them

2. The Teeth Are the Stops

The teeth are the stops that set where the mandible closes. Where the mandible closes sets where the condyle seats. An anterior restoration is therefore a decision about condylar position, made at the incisal edge.

This relationship has been measured. Crawford compared subjects whose maximum intercuspation approximated centric relation with untreated controls, using a condylar position indicator. Condylar axis position, as dictated by the occlusion, correlated strongly with signs and symptoms of TMJ dysfunction [6]. The teeth determined the condylar position, and the condylar position was associated with symptoms.

Anterior guidance is central to restorative stability [9], and it also governs muscle behaviour. Schuyler described incisal guidance as a determinant of mandibular movement equal to or greater than the joints themselves in restorative planning [30]. Williamson and Lundquist showed that anterior guidance with immediate posterior disclusion reduced elevator muscle activity in excursion [27].

When a cosmetic plan changes the anterior stops, it changes the closing path. The changes I see most often in failing cosmetic cases are these:

Table 2. Anterior restorative changes and their effect on closure

In each case the patient can still close into intercuspation. The question is where the condyle must go for that to happen. A restoration that looks correct in a static photograph can force the mandible to close behind its previous position. That is the starting point of the mechanism in the next section.

3. The Mechanism: From Retrusion to Disc Displacement

The clinical framework I teach is a sequence:

mandibular retrusion → condylar distalization → retrodiscal compression → disc displacement

Each step has an anatomical basis and supporting imaging evidence.

Step 1: Mandibular retrusion

When anterior stops are placed so that the lower incisors meet the upper lingual surfaces early in closure, the mandible must move distally to reach full intercuspation. Worn dentitions, deep overbites, retroclined maxillary incisors, and anterior restorations built into a constricted envelope all produce this pattern.

Step 2: Condylar distalization

A retruded mandible seats the condyle toward the posterior of the glenoid fossa. MRI and CT studies consistently associate a posteriorly positioned condyle with internal derangement:

• Gateno et al. compared MRI of joints with anterior disc displacement against normal

• joints. The condyles in the displacement group were positioned significantly more

• posteriorly, and the posterior displacement was 2.4 times greater than the superior

• displacement [1].

• Incesu et al. examined 122 joints by MRI and found posterior condylar position to be

• the main feature of joints with slight and moderate anterior disc displacement [2].

• Bonilla-Aragon et al. found a higher prevalence of distally positioned condyles in

• symptomatic patients with disc displacement than in 52 asymptomatic volunteers [3].

• Paknahad and Shahidi found posteriorly seated condyles on CBCT in patients with

• severe TMJ dysfunction, and anterior or concentric condyles in milder dysfunction [4].

• In patients with Class II dentofacial deformity, a posteriorly seated condyle was found

• alongside internal derangement in 53.6% of joints, compared with 10% in Class I and

• Class III patients [5].

Weinberg described the same association on tomography more than four decades ago [7].

Step 3: Retrodiscal compression

Posterior to the condyle lies the retrodiscal tissue. It is vascular, loosely organized, and richly innervated by the auriculotemporal nerve [8]. It is designed to fill space as the condyle translates forward, not to bear load. When the condyle seats distally, it loads this tissue.

The consequence is visible on MRI. In patients with disc displacement, increased T2 signal in the posterior disc attachment, reflecting increased vascularity and inflammation, is significantly associated with joint pain [10]. The TMJ is a load-bearing joint, and its cartilage and subchondral bone respond biologically to the direction and magnitude of load [11,12]. Load placed on tissue that is not built to receive it produces pain and change.

Step 4: Disc displacement

The disc is held in position by the posterior attachment. When the condyle seats distally and compresses that attachment, the posterior band is no longer held between the condyle and the eminence. The disc moves anteriorly. In early stages it reduces on opening and produces a click. With progression it fails to reduce, and opening becomes limited.

What condylar position does and does not tell you

Condylar position is a finding, not a diagnosis. Bonilla-Aragon et al. reported that a distal condyle alone identified disc displacement with a sensitivity of 0.56–0.64 [3]. Many joints with posterior condyles function without symptoms, and some displaced discs occur with centred condyles.

Population studies also show weak associations between individual occlusal features and TMJ disorders [28]. These studies describe averages across large groups. They do not describe the individual patient whose closing path, joint sounds, opening pattern, and wear have been examined. This is why the mechanism is applied through examination of the individual, not assumed from a single sign.

The clinical lesson is direct: a cosmetic plan that moves the anterior stops can move the condyle. In a joint that is already compensating, that movement can be the step that converts adaptation into dysfunction.

4. Tooth Wear Is a Mechanical History

Where there is wear, there is trouble. Significant wear is a record of force applied repeatedly over years. Before the lost anatomy is rebuilt, that record has to be read.

Wear is multifactorial. Attrition, erosion, abrasion, diet, occupation, and previous restorations all contribute [17,18]. Bruxism is a muscle activity that acts as a risk factor, and it is not diagnosed from wear alone [16]. That is why the pattern matters more than the presence of wear.

Questions to ask of every worn dentition:

• Is the wear localized or generalized, anterior or posterior?

• Is it symmetrical? Asymmetrical wear points to an asymmetrical functional path.

• Are there matching facets? When the mandible is guided into the facets, where does

• the condyle go?

• Are previous restorations failing in the same direction as the wear?

• Is there masseter hypertrophy or tenderness?

• Is the patient still losing structure, or is the pattern historical?

• Is erosion also present?

The most important question for the cosmetic plan is this: if the lost length is restored, where will the new incisal edges stop the mandible?

Shortened anterior teeth do not prove a loss of vertical dimension. Dentoalveolar eruption often compensates for wear, and the space for restoration may no longer exist in the habitual intercuspal position [18,19]. Restoring length into a space that is not there is the restorative change in Table 2 most likely to retrude the mandible.

Wear also weakens the foundation the veneer is bonded to. In a laboratory load-to-failure study, ceramic veneers on worn teeth with a shoulder preparation failed at significantly lower loads than veneers on non-worn teeth. A palatal chamfer raised the failure load from about 132 N to about 167 N [33]. A worn tooth is a weaker substrate before any occlusal factor is considered.

When vertical dimension must be increased, published rehabilitation protocols test the new position with diagnostic wax-ups and provisional restorations before definitive treatment [19,20]. The mistake is not restoring the worn tooth. The mistake is restoring the shape without understanding why it disappeared.

Table 3. What anterior wear can and cannot tell you

5. The Pre-Cosmetic Screen: Six Red Flags

The functional screen takes about sixty seconds. Its purpose is not to diagnose. It is to identify the patients in whom a change to the anterior stops carries risk. An abnormal finding is a reason to examine further before preparing teeth. The DC/TMD examination provides validated methods for each element [14].

The baseline: pain history, current or previous locking, joint sounds, maximum comfortable opening, opening path, muscle and joint tenderness, reproducibility of closure, and wear or restorative failure.

Red Flag 1: Joint clicking

A reproducible click on opening and closing is consistent with disc displacement with reduction [14]. The disc is no longer seated on the condyle in the closed position. Many clicking joints remain stable for years without pain [15]. A click still tells you the joint is functioning differently from a silent joint, and that the disc has already moved. Understand the click before changing where the condyle seats. The click carries more weight when it is painful, recent, increasing in frequency, or accompanied by intermittent locking.

Clinical signs identify disc displacement with low sensitivity [14]. When the finding will change the treatment plan, MRI confirms it.

Red Flag 2: Deviation or deflection

Deviation is movement away from the midline that returns to the midline by full opening. Deflection moves to one side and does not return. Both indicate that the two joints are not translating equally [8,14]. A mandible that does not open and close through a consistent path will not close consistently onto new anterior restorations.

Red Flag 3: Limited opening or locking

Limited opening is the strongest reason to pause elective treatment. Disc displacement without reduction presents with restricted translation, limited opening, and deflection toward the affected side [14]. Myalgia and guarding can also limit opening. Measure the opening, document it, and determine the cause before irreversible anterior treatment.

Red Flag 4: Masticatory muscle overactivity

Hypertrophic or tender masseter and temporalis muscles indicate a high-load environment. Combined with wear and restorative failure, they identify the patient in whom anterior veneers are most at risk [21].

Red Flag 5: Imaging findings

Condylar flattening, asymmetry, or osteophytes on a panoramic image justify further investigation (Section 6).

Red Flag 6: Wear and restorative breakdown

Repeated fracture, chipped ceramics, failed composite edges, and debonded veneers are a loading history visible in the treatment field. Ask why the tooth needed restoration, and then ask why the previous restoration failed. Replacing the material without answering the second question reproduces the outcome.

Table 4. The six red flags

6. Imaging: What Each Modality Can Answer

Most cosmetic patients already have a panoramic image on file. Look at the joints and the mandible on it. Then use each modality only for the question it can answer.

The panoramic image is a screening image. It can show gross condylar asymmetry, flattening, and osteophyte-like change. Its accuracy for degenerative joint disease is low compared with CBCT, but it remains useful as an initial examination when combined with clinical findings [24].

The mandible itself carries a record of muscle load. Bruxers show deeper antegonial notches, a higher antegonial index, and more bone peaks at the gonial angle than non-bruxers on panoramic images [29]. These findings support a high-load history. They do not diagnose bruxism on their own.

An elongated or calcified stylohyoid complex is also visible on the panoramic image. When it produces symptoms (Eagle syndrome), they overlap with TMJ dysfunction: ear pain, restricted opening, pain on swallowing, and pain at the first bite of a meal [31]. The two conditions can coexist, and one case report describes an elongated styloid process on the same side as an anterior disc displacement [32]. When jaw pain is accompanied by throat pain, pain on swallowing, or pain on head rotation, palpate the tonsillar fossa and examine the styloid before attributing every symptom to the joint.

CBCT characterizes bone. It shows condylar morphology, erosion, and condylar position in the fossa. It does not show the disc.

MRI shows the disc and the retrodiscal tissue. It is the modality for disc position, effusion, and signal change in the posterior attachment [10,23].

The AAOMR and AAOP position statement recommends selecting the modality by the suspected condition and the information required [23].

Table 5. Imaging selection for the cosmetic patient

7. The Appliance: Direction Is the Diagnosis

A patient develops jaw pain after anterior restorations. The reflex is to make a night guard. The better question is not which splint to give. It is this: in which direction will this appliance move the condyle?

An appliance replaces the teeth as the stops. Whatever closing position the appliance is built to, the condyle seats there. If the appliance is made by closing the patient on a hinge into the same retruded position the restorations created, it records that position and holds the condyle where it already is. The muscles may relax. The condyle stays distal, and the retrodiscal tissue stays loaded.

The orthotic is the only device that moves the condyle in the corrective direction: forward, off the retrodiscal tissue, toward a position where the disc can sit between the condyle and the eminence. The comparative evidence on appliance types supports this distinction. In a network meta-analysis of 48 randomized trials, the anterior repositioning appliance reduced pain in patients with joint-origin (arthrogenous) disorders compared with controls, reduced clicking compared with the stabilization splint, and ranked first among appliances for arthrogenous disorders [13]. The stabilization splint performed best for disorders of muscular origin [13]. Appliance design should follow the diagnosis.

Partial-coverage devices carry a separate risk. Case series document anterior open bite and occlusal change after prolonged night guard use, particularly with partial coverage [25]. Every appliance requires monitoring.

Deprogrammers and leaf gauges in the unstable joint

Anterior deprogrammers and leaf gauges are used to remove tooth-guided closure and record centric relation. When properly performed, several techniques produce reproducible records [26]. Their purpose is to let the elevator muscles seat the condyles.

In a healthy joint with a seated disc, that is the intent. In a joint where the disc is already displaced, seating the condyle under muscle force places it against the retrodiscal tissue. I do not use a deprogrammer on a joint I have not diagnosed. Painful clicking, intermittent locking, and acute arthralgia are reasons to understand the joint before recording any position from it.

Table 6. Matching the appliance to the diagnosis

8. Stabilize Before You Design

The definitive restorations should be designed around a mandibular position the patient has demonstrated, not one the restorations impose.

I call this position Optimal Physiologic Position: the position in which the condyle is seated off the retrodiscal tissue, the disc is between the condyle and the eminence where the joint allows, the muscles function without pain, and closure is reproducible. For a patient with joint dysfunction, the orthotic is how that position is found and tested. Supporting measures help the patient reach and hold it: management of awake bracing, physiotherapy, behavioural change, control of erosion, and orthodontics where tooth position prevents the mandible from closing into it.

Stabilization is matched to risk:

• Painful joint or intermittent locking. Establish Optimal Physiologic Position with the

• orthotic before any irreversible anterior treatment.

• Severe wear without symptoms. Determine where the restorative space will come

• from. Test the vertical dimension and anterior guidance provisionally [19,20].

• Stable, asymptomatic patient with no functional risk factors. Proceed with the

• conventional cosmetic workflow.

Provisionals test function

A digital smile design shows esthetics. Only function in the mouth tests function. Provisionals allow the clinician to test tooth length, phonetics, lip support, overbite and overjet, anterior guidance, posterior disclusion, the envelope of function, muscle comfort, and the reproducibility of closure. A patient who functions comfortably for several weeks in provisionals at the planned position gives more information than any digital design. Do not ask the patient to adapt to definitive ceramics when the position could have been tested first.

When to delay cosmetic treatment

Table 7. Findings that delay or expand diagnosis before elective cosmetic treatment

The case that keeps failing

If the same canine veneer debonds three times, the same incisal edge chips again, or the case keeps needing occlusal adjustment, the functional environment is part of the failure. Review preparation, bonding, thickness, enamel, parafunction, contact timing, excursive guidance, opposing materials, the envelope of function, and the position at which the case was restored. The answer may still be technical. It should no longer be assumed to be technical.

Dark margins belong in the same analysis. Marginal discolouration is one of the most common veneer complications and has several causes, including cement degradation, marginal gap, and recurrent caries. When dark margins appear together with chipping, repeated debonding, matching wear, or parafunction, include functional load in the failure analysis rather than assuming the problem is adhesive. Look beyond the cement.

Protect the finished case

A protective appliance belongs on a case that has been functionally tested. It does not compensate for a position that was never evaluated. The night guard is the maintenance strategy, not the diagnostic strategy.

9. The Question Before the Preparation

The most consequential mistake in cosmetic dentistry is often not the choice of ceramic. It is beginning treatment on the assumption that the existing bite is a neutral place to build.

In many patients it is. In others, the existing closure is the product of years of wear, eruption, parafunction, previous restorations, orthodontics, and joint change. For those patients, the dentist should ask more than the esthetic questions:

Conclusion

Cosmetic dentistry is predictable when esthetics and function are planned together. Preparation design, adhesion, ceramic selection, and marginal integrity remain essential. None of them is independent of where the mandible closes.

The teeth are the stops that set where the mandible closes and where the condyle seats. Anterior restorations move those stops. When they retrude the mandible, the condyle moves distally onto retrodiscal tissue that is innervated, vascular, and not built for load. Imaging studies associate posterior condylar position with disc displacement and with more severe dysfunction [1–5]. Condylar position is not a diagnosis on its own, so the individual joint must be examined [3,14].

Severe wear should prompt investigation before anatomy is replaced. Pain, locking, limited opening, and progressive change should be diagnosed before elective irreversible treatment. Appliances should be chosen by the direction they move the condyle. New positions should be tested in provisionals before they are made permanent in ceramic.

A cosmetic case is complete when the patient functions comfortably and repeatedly in the restored position, without the muscles, joints, or ceramics compensating for something that was not recognized before treatment.

Clinical Summary

Before cosmetic treatment, look for:

• significant anterior or generalized wear

• recurrent restoration failure

• painful or changing joint sounds

• locking history and limited opening

• deviation or deflection

• muscle tenderness or hypertrophy

• unreproducible closure or progressive bite change

• radiographic condylar change

Ask of every anterior plan:

• Will the new incisal position change where the mandible closes?

• Will that closure seat the condyle further back?

• Is this joint already compensating?

Do:

• read the wear before replacing it

• screen function before preparing teeth

• diagnose painful or locking joints first

• choose appliances by the direction they move the condyle

• establish Optimal Physiologic Position before designing extensive cases

• test new positions in provisionals

• reassess repeated failure rather than remaking it

References

1. Gateno J, Anderson PB, Xia JJ, Horng JC, Teichgraeber JF, Liebschner MA. A comparative assessment of mandibular condylar position in patients with anterior disc displacement of the temporomandibular joint. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;62(1):39–43.
2. Incesu L, Taşkaya-Yılmaz N, Öğütcen-Toller M, Uzun E. Relationship of condylar position to disc position and morphology. Eur J Radiol. 2004;51(3):269–273. doi:10.1016/S0720-048X(03)00218-3.
3. Bonilla-Aragon H, Tallents RH, Katzberg RW, Kyrkanides S, Moss ME. Condyle position as a predictor of temporomandibular joint internal derangement. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;82(2):205–208.
4. Paknahad M, Shahidi S. Association between mandibular condylar position and clinical dysfunction index. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(4):432–436. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2015.01.005.
5. Fernández Sanromán J, Gómez González JM, Alonso del Hoyo J. Relationship between condylar position, dentofacial deformity and temporomandibular joint dysfunction: an MRI and CT prospective study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1998;26(1):35–42.
6. Crawford SD. Condylar axis position, as determined by the occlusion and measured by the CPI instrument, and signs and symptoms of temporomandibular dysfunction. Angle Orthod. 1999;69(2):103–114.
7. Weinberg LA. Role of condylar position in TMJ dysfunction-pain syndrome. J Prosthet Dent. 1979;41(6):636–643.
8. Okeson JP. Management of Temporomandibular Disorders and Occlusion. 8th ed. St Louis: Elsevier; 2019.
9. Dawson PE. Functional Occlusion: From TMJ to Smile Design. St Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2007.
10. Das S, Maini AP, Kalekar T, Mishra S, Munde AD, Gaikwad T. Correlation of TMJ pain among patients with disc displacement with and without reduction with proton density fat suppression sequences/T2-weighted images of retrodiscal fibers using 3T MRI. J Indian Acad Oral Med Radiol. 2023;35(4):547–551. doi:10.4103/jiaomr.jiaomr_22_23.
11. Tanaka E, Detamore MS, Mercuri LG. Degenerative disorders of the temporomandibular joint: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. J Dent Res. 2008;87(4):296–307.
12. Nickel JC, Iwasaki LR, Gonzalez YM, Gallo LM, Yao H. Mechanobehavior and ontogenesis of the temporomandibular joint. J Dent Res. 2018;97(11):1185–1192.
13. Al-Moraissi EA, Farea R, Qasem KA, Al-Wadeai MS, Al-Sabahi ME, Al-Iryani GM. Effectiveness of occlusal splint therapy in the management of temporomandibular disorders: network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;49(8):1042–1056. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2020.01.004.
14. Schiffman E, Ohrbach R, Truelove E, et al. Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) for clinical and research applications. J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2014;28(1):6–27. doi:10.11607/jop.1151.
15. Naeije M, Te Veldhuis AH, Te Veldhuis EC, Visscher CM, Lobbezoo F. Disc displacement within the human temporomandibular joint: a systematic review of a “noisy annoyance.” J Oral Rehabil. 2013;40(2):139–158. doi:10.1111/joor.12016.
16. Lobbezoo F, Ahlberg J, Raphael KG, et al. International consensus on the assessment of bruxism: report of a work in progress. J Oral Rehabil. 2018;45(11):837–844. doi:10.1111/joor.12663.
17. Wetselaar P, Lobbezoo F. The tooth wear evaluation system: a modular clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management planning of worn dentitions. J Oral Rehabil. 2016;43(1):69–80.
18. Loomans B, Opdam N, Attin T, et al. Severe tooth wear: European consensus statement on management guidelines. J Adhes Dent. 2017;19(2):111–119.
19. Muts EJ, van Pelt H, Edelhoff D, Krejci I, Cune M. Tooth wear: a systematic review of treatment options. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(4):752–759.
20. Abduo J, Lyons K. Clinical considerations for increasing occlusal vertical dimension: a review. Aust Dent J. 2012;57(1):2–10.
21. de Souza Melo G, Batistella EÂ, Bertazzo-Silveira E, Simek Vega Gonçalves TM, Mendes de Souza BD, Porporatti AL, Flores-Mir C, De Luca Canto G. Association of sleep bruxism with ceramic restoration failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(3):354–362.
22. Morimoto S, Albanesi RB, Sesma N, Agra CM, Braga MM. Main clinical outcomes of feldspathic porcelain and glass-ceramic laminate veneers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and complication rates. Int J Prosthodont. 2016;29(1):38–49.
23. Mallya SM, Ahmad M, Cohen JR, Kaspo G, Ramesh A. Recommendations for imaging of the temporomandibular joint: position statement from the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology and the American Academy of Orofacial Pain. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2022;134(5):639–648. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2022.06.007.
24. Schroder ÂGD, Gonçalves FM, Germiniani JS, Schroder LD, Porporatti AL, Zeigelboim BS, de Araujo CM, Santos RS, Stechman-Neto J. Diagnosis of TMJ degenerative diseases by panoramic radiography: is it possible? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2023;27(11).
25. Bereznicki T, Barry E, Wilson NHF. Unintended changes to the occlusion following the provision of night guards. Br Dent J. 2018;225(8):715–722.
26. Kattadiyil MT, Alzaid AA, Campbell SD. What materials and reproducible techniques may be used in recording centric relation? Best Evidence Consensus Statement. J Prosthodont. 2021;30(S1):34–42.
27. Williamson EH, Lundquist DO. Anterior guidance: its effect on electromyographic activity of the temporal and masseter muscles. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;49(6):816–823.
28. Manfredini D, Lombardo L, Siciliani G. Temporomandibular disorders and dental occlusion. A systematic review of association studies: end of an era? J Oral Rehabil. 2017;44(11):908–923. doi:10.1111/joor.12531.
29. Erzurumlu ZU, Sadik E, Gokkurt BN, Ozbey F, Erzurumlu K, Kasko Arici Y. Morphological evaluation of gonial and antegonial regions in bruxers on panoramic radiographic images. BMC Oral Health. 2023;23:457. doi:10.1186/s12903-023-03162-0.
30. Schuyler CH. The function and importance of incisal guidance in oral rehabilitation. J Prosthet Dent. 1963;13(6):1011–1029.
31. Gauthier B, Ségolène G, Bruno C. First-bite syndrome and Eagle syndrome. J Oral Med Oral Surg. 2018;24(1):36–39. doi:10.1051/mbcb/2017025.
32. Messina G. The role of the styloid apophysis of the temporal bone in the biomechanics of the tongue, mandible, hyoid system: a case study. Eur J Transl Myol. 2020;30(1):111– 115. doi:10.4081/ejtm.2019.8808.
33. Schmidt KK, Chiayabutr Y, Phillips KM, Kois JC. Influence of preparation design and existing condition of tooth structure on load to failure of ceramic laminate veneers. J Prosthet Dent. 2011;105(6):374–382. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60077-2.