BACKGROUND: A clinical classification of surface defects in gingival recession area is proposed. METHODS: Two factors were evaluated to set up a classification system: presence (A) or absence (B) of cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and presence (+) or absence (-) of dental surface discrepancy caused by abrasion (step). Four classes (A+, A-, B+, and B-) were identified on the basis of these variables. To validate the classification three different calibrated examiners applied the proposed classification system to 46 gingival recessions and kappa statistics were performed. The classification was used on 1,010 gingival recessions from 353 patients to examine the distribution of the four classes. RESULTS: The kappa statistics for intrarater agreement ranged from 0.74 to 0.95 (almost perfect agreement), whereas interrater agreement ranged from 0.26 to 0.59 (moderate agreement). Out of 1,010 exposed root surfaces associated with gingival recession, 144 showed an identifiable CEJ associated with a root surface defect (Class A+, 14%); 469 an identifiable CEJ without any associated step (Class A-, 46%); 244 an unidentifiable CEJ with a step (Class B+, 24%); and 153 an unidentifiable CEJ without any associated step (Class B-, 15%). CONCLUSION: The proposed classification describes the dental surface defects that are of paramount importance in diagnosing gingival recession areas.
BACKGROUND: A clinical classification of surface defects in gingival recession area is proposed. METHODS: Two factors were evaluated to set up a classification system: presence (A) or absence (B) of cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and presence (+) or absence (-) of dental surface discrepancy caused by abrasion (step). Four classes (A+, A-, B+, and B-) were identified on the basis of these variables. To validate the classification three different calibrated examiners applied the proposed classification system to 46 gingival recessions and kappa statistics were performed. The classification was used on 1,010 gingival recessions from 353 patients to examine the distribution of the four classes. RESULTS: The kappa statistics for intrarater agreement ranged from 0.74 to 0.95 (almost perfect agreement), whereas interrater agreement ranged from 0.26 to 0.59 (moderate agreement). Out of 1,010 exposed root surfaces associated with gingival recession, 144 showed an identifiable CEJ associated with a root surface defect (Class A+, 14%); 469 an identifiable CEJ without any associated step (Class A-, 46%); 244 an unidentifiable CEJ with a step (Class B+, 24%); and 153 an unidentifiable CEJ without any associated step (Class B-, 15%). CONCLUSION: The proposed classification describes the dental surface defects that are of paramount importance in diagnosing gingival recession areas.
Authors: Maurizio S Tonetti; Pierpaolo Cortellini; Gaia Pellegrini; Michele Nieri; Daniele Bonaccini; Mario Allegri; Philippe Bouchard; Francesco Cairo; Gianpaolo Conforti; Ioannis Fourmousis; Filippo Graziani; Adrian Guerrero; Jan Halben; Jacques Malet; Giulio Rasperini; Heinz Topoll; Hannes Wachtel; Beat Wallkamm; Ion Zabalegui; Otto Zuhr Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 8.728