G Yang1, W J Hu1, J Cao1, D G Liu2. 1. Department of Periodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China. 2. Department of Radiology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure the three-dimensional morphology of the labial supraosseous gingiva (SOG) and the thickness of related labial bone in maxillary anterior teeth of periodontally healthy Han nationality youth using soft tissue indirect imaging cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: Twenty-five periodontally healthy subjects (11 males and 14 females) with 150 maxillary anterior teeth were involved in this study. A special impression with radiopaque material including the maxillary teeth was made, then a CBCT scan with the elastomeric matrix in position was taken for each subject. The imaging data were generated and transferred to a volumetric imaging software in which three-dimensional reconstruction was conducted and the image analyses were carried out. Measurements were made at the site of labial center of the maxillary anterior teeth. The height of the SOG, the distance between cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and bone crest, the gingival thickness at the CEJ, and the thickness of bone 2 mm below the labial bone crest were measured and the correlation analysis between the parameters was made. All the data analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0. The data were analyzed with ANVOA and Pearson correlation tests with the significance level at α=0.05. RESULTS: The mean SOG values were (3.49±0.70) mm, (3.48±0.81) mm, and (3.54±0.67) mm for central incisors, lateral incisors and canines, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences among the different sites (P > 0.05). The mean gingival thickness values were (1.45±0.23) mm, (1.13±0.24) mm, (1.14±0.22) mm for central incisors, lateral incisors and canines, respectively. The gingival thickness of the central incisors was the largest among the maxillary anterior teeth with statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). No correlation was found between the SOG and gingival thickness among the maxillary anterior teeth (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The gingival thickness of central incisors was the largest and the supraosseous gingival height had no correlation with gingival thickness among the periodontally healthy maxillary anterior teeth.
OBJECTIVE: To measure the three-dimensional morphology of the labial supraosseous gingiva (SOG) and the thickness of related labial bone in maxillary anterior teeth of periodontally healthy Han nationality youth using soft tissue indirect imaging cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: Twenty-five periodontally healthy subjects (11 males and 14 females) with 150 maxillary anterior teeth were involved in this study. A special impression with radiopaque material including the maxillary teeth was made, then a CBCT scan with the elastomeric matrix in position was taken for each subject. The imaging data were generated and transferred to a volumetric imaging software in which three-dimensional reconstruction was conducted and the image analyses were carried out. Measurements were made at the site of labial center of the maxillary anterior teeth. The height of the SOG, the distance between cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and bone crest, the gingival thickness at the CEJ, and the thickness of bone 2 mm below the labial bone crest were measured and the correlation analysis between the parameters was made. All the data analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0. The data were analyzed with ANVOA and Pearson correlation tests with the significance level at α=0.05. RESULTS: The mean SOG values were (3.49±0.70) mm, (3.48±0.81) mm, and (3.54±0.67) mm for central incisors, lateral incisors and canines, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences among the different sites (P > 0.05). The mean gingival thickness values were (1.45±0.23) mm, (1.13±0.24) mm, (1.14±0.22) mm for central incisors, lateral incisors and canines, respectively. The gingival thickness of the central incisors was the largest among the maxillary anterior teeth with statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). No correlation was found between the SOG and gingival thickness among the maxillary anterior teeth (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The gingival thickness of central incisors was the largest and the supraosseous gingival height had no correlation with gingival thickness among the periodontally healthy maxillary anterior teeth.
Authors: D Ryan Cook; Brian L Mealey; Ronald G Verrett; Michael P Mills; Marcel E Noujeim; David J Lasho; Robert J Cronin Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Date: 2011 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: J S Vacek; M E Gher; D A Assad; A C Richardson; L I Giambarresi Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Date: 1994-04 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: Andres Pascual La Rocca; Antonio Santos Alemany; Paul Levi; Monica Vicario Juan; Jose Nart Molina; Arnold S Weisgold Journal: Implant Dent Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 2.454