Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

  • 제53권5호
  • /
  • Pages.362-375
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 2093-2278(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2093-2286(eISSN)
대한치주과학회 (Korean Academy of Periodontology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Revisiting the measurement of keratinized gingiva: a cross-sectional study comparing an intraoral scanner with clinical parameters

  • Ahmet Mert Nalbantoglu (Department of Periodontology, Antalya Bilim University, Faculty of Dentistry) ;
  • Deniz Yanik (Department of Endodontics, Antalya Bilim University, Faculty of Dentistry)
  • 투고 : 2022.10.12
  • 심사 : 2023.05.15
  • 발행 : 2023.10.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between gingival thickness (GT) and keratinized gingiva width (KGW), papilla height (PH), and crown ratio (CR) by employing transgingival probing and an intraoral scanner (IOS). Methods: This cross-sectional study examined 360 maxillary anterior teeth from 60 patients. GT was assessed using transgingival probing with an endodontic spreader. KGW, CR, and PH were measured using an IOS. One-way analysis of variance, the Student's t-test, and Spearman correlation coefficients were employed for statistical analysis. Results: Higher GT was significantly associated with thinner KGW in the central region (P=0.019). There was no statistically significant difference in GT between teeth (P=0.06). PH was lower in lateral teeth than in canines (P=0.047), with a PH of 2.99 mm in lateral teeth. The KGW was narrower in canines than in central teeth (P=0.007). A moderate correlation was observed between KGW and PH in the central region (P=0.01), while a weak negative correlation was found between KGW and CR (P=0.043). Conclusions: A moderate negative correlation was found between GT and KGW, as well as between PH and KGW in central teeth. In contrast, a weak negative correlation existed between CR and KGW. The PH (2.99 mm) was lower in lateral teeth than in canines. The traditional paradigm, which suggests a positive correlation between KGW and GT, was reevaluated by measuring KGW using an IOS.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Wei D, Di P, Tian J, Zhao Y, Lin Y. Evaluation of intraoral digital impressions for obtaining gingival contour in the esthetic zone: accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Investig 2020;24:1401-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03105-6
  2. Jepsen S, Caton JG, Albandar JM, Bissada NF, Bouchard P, Cortellini P, et al. Periodontal manifestations of systemic diseases and developmental and acquired conditions: consensus report of workgroup 3 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45 Suppl 20:S219-29.
  3. Frost NA, Mealey BL, Jones AA, Huynh-Ba G. Periodontal biotype: gingival thickness as it relates to probe visibility and buccal plate thickness. J Periodontol 2015;86:1141-9. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2015.140394
  4. Vlachodimou E, Fragkioudakis I, Vouros I. Is there an association between the gingival phenotype and the width of keratinized gingiva? A systematic review. Dent J (Basel) 2021;9:34.
  5. Chu SJ, Tan JH, Stappert CF, Tarnow DP. Gingival zenith positions and levels of the maxillary anterior dentition. J Esthet Restor Dent 2009;21:113-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00242.x
  6. Fischer KR, Richter T, Kebschull M, Petersen N, Fickl S. On the relationship between gingival biotypes and gingival thickness in young Caucasians. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:865-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12356
  7. Kloukos D, Koukos G, Doulis I, Sculean A, Stavropoulos A, Katsaros C. Gingival thickness assessment at the mandibular incisors with four methods: a cross-sectional study. J Periodontol 2018;89:1300-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.18-0125
  8. Kloukos D, Koukos G, Gkantidis N, Sculean A, Katsaros C, Stavropoulos A. Transgingival probing: a clinical gold standard for assessing gingival thickness. Quintessence Int 2021:394-401.
  9. Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, Roe P, Smith DH. Gingival biotype assessment in the esthetic zone: visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2010;30:237-43.
  10. Lin GH, Chan HL, Wang HL. The significance of keratinized mucosa on implant health: a systematic review. J Periodontol 2013;84:1755-67. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2013.120688
  11. De Rouck T, Eghbali R, Collys K, De Bruyn H, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype revisited: transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:428-33.
  12. Song JW, Leesungbok R, Park SJ, Chang SH, Ahn SJ, Lee SW. Analysis of crown size and morphology, and gingival shape in the maxillary anterior dentition in Korean young adults. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9:315-20. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.4.315
  13. Olsson M, Lindhe J, Marinello CP. On the relationship between crown form and clinical features of the gingiva in adolescents. J Clin Periodontol 1993;20:570-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1993.tb00773.x
  14. Ganti B, Bednarz W, Komuves K, Vag J. Reproducibility of the PIROP ultrasonic biometer for gingival thickness measurements. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019;31:263-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12446
  15. Lee JS, Jeon YS, Strauss FJ, Jung HI, Gruber R. Digital scanning is more accurate than using a periodontal probe to measure the keratinized tissue width. Sci Rep 2020;10:3665.
  16. Egreja AM, Kahn S, Barceleiro M, Bittencourt S. Relationship between the width of the zone of keratinized tissue and thickness of gingival tissue in the anterior maxilla. Int J Periodont Restor Dent 2012;32:573-9.
  17. Shah R, Sowmya NK, Mehta DS. Prevalence of gingival biotype and its relationship to clinical parameters. Contemp Clin Dent 2015;6:S167-71.
  18. Fischer KR, Grill E, Jockel-Schneider Y, Bechtold M, Schlagenhauf U, Fickl S. On the relationship between gingival biotypes and supracrestal gingival height, crown form and papilla height. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:894-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12196
  19. Jing WD, Xu L, Xu X, Hou JX, Li XT. Association between periodontal biotype and clinical parameters: a cross-sectional study in patients with skeletal class III malocclusion. Chin J Dent Res 2019;22:9-19.
  20. Ko KA, Lee JS, Kim JH, Park JM, Gruber R, Thoma DS. Changes in mucogingival junction after an apically positioned flap with collagen matrix at sites with or without previous guided bone regeneration: a prospective comparative cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2020;31:1199-206. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13665
  21. Shao Y, Yin L, Gu J, Wang D, Lu W, Sun Y. Assessment of periodontal biotype in a young Chinese population using different measurement methods. Sci Rep 2018;8:11212.
  22. Smith BG, Knight JK. An index for measuring the wear of teeth. Br Dent J 1984;156:435-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4805394
  23. Zhong C, Yingzi X, Zhiqiang L, Peishuang W, Yimin Z, Shanqing G, et al. Analysis of crown morphology and gingival shape in the maxillary anterior dentition. Int J Periodont Restor Dent 2020;40:925-31. https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.4696
  24. Silness J, Loe H. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. II. Correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condition. Acta Odontol Scand 1964;22:121-35. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356408993968
  25. Loe H, Silness J. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. I. Prevalence and severity. Acta Odontol Scand 1963;21:533-51. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356309011240
  26. Ronay V, Sahrmann P, Bindl A, Attin T, Schmidlin PR. Current status and perspectives of mucogingival soft tissue measurement methods. J Esthet Restor Dent 2011;23:146-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2011.00424.x
  27. Yin XJ, Wei BY, Ke XP, Zhang T, Jiang MY, Luo XY, et al. Correlation between clinical parameters of crown and gingival morphology of anterior teeth and periodontal biotypes. BMC Oral Health 2020;20:59.
  28. Kim YJ, Park JM, Kim S, Koo KT, Seol YJ, Lee YM, et al. New method of assessing the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2016;46:372-81. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2016.46.6.372
  29. La Rocca AP, Alemany AS, Levi P Jr, Juan MV, Molina JN, Weisgold AS. Anterior maxillary and mandibular biotype: relationship between gingival thickness and width with respect to underlying bone thickness. Implant Dent 2012;21:507-15. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e318271d487
  30. Hwang D, Wang HL. Flap thickness as a predictor of root coverage: a systematic review. J Periodontol 2006;77:1625-34.
  31. Jennes ME, Sachse C, Flugge T, Preissner S, Heiland M, Nahles S. Gender- and age-related differences in the width of attached gingiva and clinical crown length in anterior teeth. BMC Oral Health 2021;21:287.
  32. Vandana KL, Savitha B. Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location. J Clin Periodontol 2005;32:828-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00757.x
  33. Lim HC, Lee J, Kang DY, Cho IW, Shin HS, Park JC. Digital assessment of gingival dimensions of healthy periodontium. J Clin Med 2021;10:1550.
  34. Zhang J, Huang Z, Cai Y, Luan Q. Digital assessment of gingiva morphological changes and related factors after initial periodontal therapy. J Oral Sci 2021;63:59-64. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.20-0157
  35. Eger T, Muller HP, Heinecke A. Ultrasonic determination of gingival thickness. Subject variation and influence of tooth type and clinical features. J Clin Periodontol 1996;23:839-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1996.tb00621.x
  36. Stein JM, Lintel-Hoping N, Hammacher C, Kasaj A, Tamm M, Hanisch O. The gingival biotype: measurement of soft and hard tissue dimensions - a radiographic morphometric study. J Clin Periodontol 2013;40:1132-9.
  37. Guglielmoni P, Promsudthi A, Tatakis DN, Trombelli L. Intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility in keratinized tissue width assessment with 3 methods for mucogingival junction determination. J Periodontol 2001;72:134-9. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.2.134
  38. Joshi A, Suragimath G, Zope SA, Ashwinirani SR, Varma SA. Comparison of gingival biotype between different genders based on measurement of dentopapillary complex. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11:ZC40-5.
  39. Couso-Queiruga E, Tattan M, Ahmad U, Barwacz C, Gonzalez-Martin O, Avila-Ortiz G. Assessment of gingival thickness using digital file superimposition versus direct clinical measurements. Clin Oral Investig 2021;25:2353-61.
  40. Stellini E, Comuzzi L, Mazzocco F, Parente N, Gobbato L. Relationships between different tooth shapes and patient's periodontal phenotype. J Periodontal Res 2013;48:657-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/jre.12057
  41. Chow YC, Eber RM, Tsao YP, Shotwell JL, Wang HL. Factors associated with the appearance of gingival papillae. J Clin Periodontol 2010;37:719-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01594.x
  42. Kolte AP, Kolte RA, Pajnigara NG, Pajnigara NG. A clinical and radiographic assessment of positional variations of gingival papilla and its proportions. Int J Periodont Restor Dent 2016;36:213-8. https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.2464
  43. Lee SP, Kim TI, Kim HK, Shon WJ, Park YS. Discriminant analysis for the thin periodontal biotype based on the data acquired from three-dimensional virtual models of Korean young adults. J Periodontol 2013;84:1638-45.