Mohit G Kheur1, Nidhi R Kantharia, Supriya M Kheur, Aneesha Acharya, Bach Le, Tania Sethi. 1. *Professor and Post Graduate Guide, Department of Prosthodontics, M.A. Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Pune, India. †Post Graduate Student, Department of Prosthodontics, M.A. Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Pune, India. ‡Professor and Head of Department, Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Pune, India. §MPhil Candidate, Oral Rehabilitation, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Professor, Department of Periodontology, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Pune, India. ¶Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, The Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles County/USC Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. ‖Postgraduate student, Department of Prosthodontics, M.A. Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Pune, India.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study explored the relationship between the thickness of bone and soft tissue along the labial and palatal aspect of maxillary central incisors. The influence of overall socket width, labiopalatal positioning of the incisor on the bone, and soft tissue thickness were also investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used cone-beam computed tomography of 150 patients to determine labial, palatal soft and hard tissue thickness, labiopalatal (B-P) socket width and corelated the same to the labiopalatal positioning of maxillary central incisors. RESULTS: Mean (SD) thicknesses of the labial soft tissue at cervical (C), midroot (M), and apical (A) locations and the corresponding bone thicknesses were 1.07 (0.28), 0.987 (0.27), 1.240 (0.41), and 0.928 (0.39), 0.894 (0.52), 1.57 (0.88), respectively. Similarly, palatal soft tissue and bone thicknesses at locations C, M, A were 1.807 (0.66), 1.557 (0.62), 1.639 (0.66), and 1.679 (0.62), 3.439 (1.28), 6.038 (1.63), respectively. Mean (SD) thicknesses of the B-P socket width at location C was 8.047 (0.963). CONCLUSIONS: There is a positive correlation between the labial and palatal bone and corresponding soft tissue thickness, between thickness of the labial bone and the labiopalatal thickness of the alveolar socket. No correlation was observed between the thickness of the labial cortical bone and the labiopalatal positioning of the tooth.
INTRODUCTION: This study explored the relationship between the thickness of bone and soft tissue along the labial and palatal aspect of maxillary central incisors. The influence of overall socket width, labiopalatal positioning of the incisor on the bone, and soft tissue thickness were also investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used cone-beam computed tomography of 150 patients to determine labial, palatal soft and hard tissue thickness, labiopalatal (B-P) socket width and corelated the same to the labiopalatal positioning of maxillary central incisors. RESULTS: Mean (SD) thicknesses of the labial soft tissue at cervical (C), midroot (M), and apical (A) locations and the corresponding bone thicknesses were 1.07 (0.28), 0.987 (0.27), 1.240 (0.41), and 0.928 (0.39), 0.894 (0.52), 1.57 (0.88), respectively. Similarly, palatal soft tissue and bone thicknesses at locations C, M, A were 1.807 (0.66), 1.557 (0.62), 1.639 (0.66), and 1.679 (0.62), 3.439 (1.28), 6.038 (1.63), respectively. Mean (SD) thicknesses of the B-P socket width at location C was 8.047 (0.963). CONCLUSIONS: There is a positive correlation between the labial and palatal bone and corresponding soft tissue thickness, between thickness of the labial bone and the labiopalatal thickness of the alveolar socket. No correlation was observed between the thickness of the labial cortical bone and the labiopalatal positioning of the tooth.
Authors: Diogo M Rodrigues; Rodrigo L Petersen; Caroline Montez; José R de Moraes; Alessandro L Januário; Eliane P Barboza Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-09-16 Impact factor: 3.606
Authors: Julio Rojo-Sanchis; David Soto-Peñaloza; David Peñarrocha-Oltra; Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago; José Viña-Almunia Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2021-03-22 Impact factor: 2.757