Objective: To compare the aesthetic effects and periodontal health status of porcelain veneers and light-cured resin veneers in the repair of fluorosis dentition. Methods From May 2023 to May 2025, 96 patients with fluorosis dentition (a total of 196 teeth) were admitted to our hospital. They were randomly equally divided into the porcelain veneer group (n = 48, 100 teeth) and the resin veneer group (n = 48, 96 teeth). The porcelain veneer group was treated with cast ceramic veneers, and the resin veneer group was treated with nano-light-cured resin veneers. Follow-up was conducted for 12 months, and statistical analysis was performed on the differences in restoration success rate, red aesthetic score (PES), white aesthetic score (WES), levels of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) in gingival crevicular fluid, and periodontal health index between the two groups. Results The difference in restoration success rate between the two groups was compared (96.00% vs 88.54%, P < 0.05). The difference in PES and WES scores 12 months after restoration between the two groups was compared (P < 0.001). The difference in levels of TNF-α and MMP-2 in gingival crevicular fluid 12 months after restoration between the two groups was compared (P < 0.001). The difference in periodontal health index 12 months after restoration between the two groups was compared (SBI, PLI, and GI of the porcelain veneer group were all lower than those of the resin veneer group, P < 0.001). Conclusion Porcelain veneers have better aesthetic effects than light-cured resin veneers in the repair of fluorosis dentition. They have higher restoration success rates and are more conducive to maintaining periodontal health, and are worthy of clinical priority application.