| Literature DB >> 27382507 |
Jin-Seok Jeong1, Seung-Youp Lee2, Moontaek Chang3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate alterations of papilla dimensions after orthodontic closure of the diastema between maxillary central incisors.Entities:
Keywords: Dental esthetics; Gingiva; Orthodontic space closure
Year: 2016 PMID: 27382507 PMCID: PMC4928207 DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2016.46.3.197
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Periodontal Implant Sci ISSN: 2093-2278 Impact factor: 2.614
Figure 1Clinical photographs of a 13-year-old female patient. (A) Before orthodontic closure of the diastema between maxillary central incisors; (B) At the follow-up examination after closure of the diastema.
Figure 2Photographic (A) and study model assessments (B and C). CCH, clinical crown height; PH, papilla height; REF, reference line; PBW, papilla base width; CCW, clinical crown width; DW, diastema width; PBT, papilla base thickness.
Description of the patient samples
| Variable | Outcome assessment |
|---|---|
| No. of patients | 60 |
| Mean age (range:yr) | 19 (10-46) |
| Sex ratio (male/female) | 24/36 |
| Mean follow-up (range:mon) | 28 (6-209) |
| Mean diastema width before orthodontic treatment (range:mm) | 1.1 (0.3-3.0) |
Alterations of the papilla height, clinical crown height, and papilla base thickness after orthodontic closure of the diastema
| Variable | Before orthodontic treatment | At follow-up examination | Difference | 95 % confidence interval | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Photographic assessment | ||||||
| Papilla height | 5.52±0.86 | 4.71±0.93 | -0.80±0.84 | -1.03/-0.58 | 0.000 | |
| Study model assessment | ||||||
| Clinical crown height | 9.85±0.84 | 9.89±0.85 | 0.04±0.29 | -0.04/0.11 | 0.320 | |
| Papilla base thickness | 8.38±0.67 | 8.91±0.60 | 0.52±0.56 | 0.36/0.67 | 0.001 | |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Figure 3Relationships between the papilla dimensions assessed before orthodontic treatment and the alterations of papilla height and papilla base thickness after orthodontic closure of the diastema. (A) Papilla height versus papilla height alteration; (B) Papilla base thickness versus papilla height alteration; (C) Diastema width versus papilla base thickness alteration; (D) Papilla base thickness versus papilla base thickness alteration. PH, papilla height; PBT, papilla base thickness; DW, diastema width.
Multiple regression analysis with the alteration of papilla base thickness after orthodontic closure of the maxillary midline diastema as the dependent variable (mean change 0.5 mm)
| Independent Variablesa) (Adjusted R2: 0.27) | F-value: 7.634 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE of estimate | ||
| Intercept | 3.756 | 1.069 | 0.001 |
| PBT | -0.481 | 0.117 | 0.000 |
| PBW | 0.080 | 0.086 | 0.353 |
| PH | 0.009 | 0.096 | 0.925 |
SE, standard error; PBT, papilla base thickness; PBW, papilla base width; PH, papilla height.
a)Assessed before orthodontic treatment.