Purpose: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis based on clinical trials that evaluated the main outcomes of glass-ceramic and feldspathic porcelain laminate veneers. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was carried out in Cochrane and PubMed databases. From the selected studies, the survival rates for porcelain and glassceramic veneers were extracted, as were complication rates of clinical outcomes: debonding, fracture/chipping, secondary caries, endodontic problems, severe marginal discoloration, and influence of incisal coverage and enamel/dentin preparation. The Cochran Q test and the I2 statistic were used to evaluate heterogeneity. Results: Out of the 899 articles initially identified, 13 were included for analysis. Metaregression analysis showed that the types of ceramics and follow-up periods had no influence on failure rate. The estimated overall cumulative survival rate was 89% (95% CI: 84% to 94%) in a median follow-up period of 9 years. The estimated survival for glass-ceramic was 94% (95% CI: 87% to 100%), and for feldspathic porcelain veneers, 87% (95% CI: 82% to 93%). The meta-analysis showed rates for the following events: debonding: 2% (95% CI: 1% to 4%); fracture/chipping: 4% (95% CI: 3% to 6%); secondary caries: 1% (95% CI: 0% to 3%); severe marginal discoloration: 2% (95% CI: 1% to 10%); endodontic problems: 2% (95% CI: 1% to 3%); and incisal coverage odds ratio: 1.25 (95% CI: 0.33 to 4.73). It was not possible to perform meta-analysis of the influence of enamel/dentin preparation on failure rates. Conclusion: Glass-ceramic and porcelain laminate veneers have high survival rates. Fracture/ chipping was the most frequent complication, providing evidence that ceramic veneers are a safe treatment option that preserve tooth structure.