Reza Amid1, Mahdieh Mirakhori2, Yaser Safi3, Mahdi Kadkhodazadeh4, Mahshid Namdari5. 1. Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: Reza_Amid@yahoo.com. 2. DDS, Dental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: mirakhori_mahdie@yahoo.com. 3. Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: Yaser_Safi@yahoo.com. 4. Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: Kadkhodazadehmahdi@yahoo.com. 5. Department of Community Oral Health, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: mah.namdari@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the relationship between facial gingival and bone dimensions in maxillary anterior teeth region using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). DESIGN: This study assessed 621 maxillary anterior teeth in 144 patients. In the sagittal plane, facial bone thickness (BT) and gingival thickness (GT) were measured at the crestal level and at 2, 4 and 6mm apical to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ). The dentogingival complex (DGC) dimensions and the distance from the CEJ to bone crest were also measured on CBCT scans. To determine the gingival biotype, GT at 2mm apical to the gingival margin was measured and GT <1.5mm was categorized as thin while GT ≥1.5mm was categorized as thick. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 21 via repeated measures ANOVA and the Cochrane's Q, chi-square and independent samples t-tests. RESULTS: The BT around the maxillary central and lateral incisors and canine teeth at 4 and 6mm apical to the CEJ was significantly different in thick and thin gingival biotypes (P<0.05). The mean GT at 2 and 4mm apical to the CEJ was significantly different around central and lateral incisors (P<0.05). Thickness of crestal bone was significantly different between the two gingival biotypes around central and lateral incisors (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The two gingival biotypes had significantly different mean BT; different biotypes and their relationship to BT varied around anterior maxillary teeth.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the relationship between facial gingival and bone dimensions in maxillary anterior teeth region using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). DESIGN: This study assessed 621 maxillary anterior teeth in 144 patients. In the sagittal plane, facial bone thickness (BT) and gingival thickness (GT) were measured at the crestal level and at 2, 4 and 6mm apical to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ). The dentogingival complex (DGC) dimensions and the distance from the CEJ to bone crest were also measured on CBCT scans. To determine the gingival biotype, GT at 2mm apical to the gingival margin was measured and GT <1.5mm was categorized as thin while GT ≥1.5mm was categorized as thick. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 21 via repeated measures ANOVA and the Cochrane's Q, chi-square and independent samples t-tests. RESULTS: The BT around the maxillary central and lateral incisors and canine teeth at 4 and 6mm apical to the CEJ was significantly different in thick and thin gingival biotypes (P<0.05). The mean GT at 2 and 4mm apical to the CEJ was significantly different around central and lateral incisors (P<0.05). Thickness of crestal bone was significantly different between the two gingival biotypes around central and lateral incisors (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The two gingival biotypes had significantly different mean BT; different biotypes and their relationship to BT varied around anterior maxillary teeth.
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
Authors: Nancy E Córdova-Limaylla; José C Rosas-Díaz; Rocío Alvarez-Medina; Jerson J Palomino-Zorrilla; Maria E Guerrero-Acevedo; Luis A Cervantes-Ganoza; Carlos López-Gurreonero; César F Cayo-Rojas Journal: J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Date: 2021-11-30