Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

New method of assessing the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness

  • Kim, Yun-Jeong (Department of Periodontology, Seoul National University Gwanak Dental Hospital) ;
  • Park, Ji-Man (Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul National University Gwanak Dental Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Sungtae (Department of Periodontology, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Koo, Ki-Tae (Department of Periodontology, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Seol, Yang-Jo (Department of Periodontology, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Yong-Moo (Department of Periodontology, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Rhyu, In-Chul (Department of Periodontology, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Ku, Young (Department of Periodontology, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry)
  • Received : 2016.08.29
  • Accepted : 2016.10.25
  • Published : 2016.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness by means of a noninvasive and relatively accurate digital registration method. Methods: In 20 periodontally healthy subjects, cone-beam computed tomographic images and intraoral scanned files were obtained. Measurements of buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness at the central incisors, lateral incisors, and canines were performed at points 0-5 mm from the alveolar crest on the superimposed images. The Friedman test was used to compare buccal bone and gingival thickness for each depth between the 3 tooth types. Spearman's correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the correlation between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness. Results: Of the central incisors, 77% of all sites had a buccal thickness of 0.5-1.0 mm, and 23% had a thickness of 1.0-1.5 mm. Of the lateral incisors, 71% of sites demonstrated a buccal bone thickness <1.0 mm, as did 63% of the canine sites. For gingival thickness, the proportion of sites <1.0 mm was 88%, 82%, and 91% for the central incisors, lateral incisors, and canines, respectively. Significant differences were observed in gingival thickness at the alveolar crest level (G0) between the central incisors and canines (P=0.032) and between the central incisors and lateral incisors (P=0.013). At 1 mm inferior to the alveolar crest, a difference was found between the central incisors and canines (P=0.025). The lateral incisors and canines showed a significant difference for buccal bone thickness 5 mm under the alveolar crest (P=0.025). Conclusions: The gingiva and buccal bone of the anterior maxillary teeth were found to be relatively thin (<1 mm) overall. A tendency was found for gingival thickness to increase and bone thickness to decrease toward the root apex. Differences were found between teeth at some positions, although the correlation between buccal bone thickness and soft tissue thickness was generally not significant.

Keywords

References

  1. Olsson M, Lindhe J. Periodontal characteristics in individuals with varying form of the upper central incisors. J Clin Periodontol 1991;18:78-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1991.tb01124.x
  2. Weisgold AS. Contours of the full crown restoration. Alpha Omegan 1977;70:77-89.
  3. Evans CD, Chen ST. Esthetic outcomes of immediate implant placements. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:73-80.
  4. Kois JC. Predictable single-tooth peri-implant esthetics: five diagnostic keys. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2004;25:895-6, 898, 900 passim.
  5. Hwang D, Wang HL. Flap thickness as a predictor of root coverage: a systematic review. J Periodontol 2006;77:1625-34. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2006.060107
  6. Baldi C, Pini-Prato G, Pagliaro U, Nieri M, Saletta D, Muzzi L, et al. Coronally advanced flap procedure for root coverage. Is flap thickness a relevant predictor to achieve root coverage? A 19-case series. J Periodontol 1999;70:1077-84. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1999.70.9.1077
  7. Fu JH, Yeh CY, Chan HL, Tatarakis N, Leong DJ, Wang HL. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. J Periodontol 2010;81:569-74. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090591
  8. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12169
  9. Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites. J Clin Periodontol 2004;31:820-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00565.x
  10. Lee SL, Kim HJ, Son MK, Chung CH. Anthropometric analysis of maxillary anterior buccal bone of Korean adults using cone-beam CT. J Adv Prosthodont 2010;2:92-6. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2010.2.3.92
  11. Januario AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the facial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22:1168-71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x
  12. Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Umezu K, Kois JC. Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: an evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants in humans. J Periodontol 2003;74:557-62. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2003.74.4.557
  13. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01398.x
  14. 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.
  15. Claffey N, Shanley D. Relationship of gingival thickness and bleeding to loss of probing attachment in shallow sites following nonsurgical periodontal therapy. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13:654-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1986.tb00861.x
  16. 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
  17. Younes F, Eghbali A, Raes M, De Bruyckere T, Cosyn J, De Bruyn H. Relationship between buccal bone and gingival thickness revisited using non-invasive registration methods. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27:523-8.
  18. Sanz Martin I, Benic GI, Hammerle CH, Thoma DS. Prospective randomized controlled clinical study comparing two dental implant types: volumetric soft tissue changes at 1 year of loading. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27:406-11.
  19. Windisch SI, Jung RE, Sailer I, Studer SP, Ender A, Hammerle CH. A new optical method to evaluate three-dimensional volume changes of alveolar contours: a methodological in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:545-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01382.x
  20. Nikiforidou M, Tsalikis L, Angelopoulos C, Menexes G, Vouros I, Konstantinides A. Classification of periodontal biotypes with the use of CBCT. A cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:2061-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1694-y
  21. Nowzari H, Molayem S, Chiu CH, Rich SK. Cone beam computed tomographic measurement of maxillary central incisors to determine prevalence of facial alveolar bone width ${\geq}2$ mm. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:595-602. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00287.x
  22. Muller HP, Schaller N, Eger T, Heinecke A. Thickness of masticatory mucosa. J Clin Periodontol 2000;27:431-6. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051x.2000.027006431.x

Cited by

  1. Combining virtual model and cone beam computed tomography to assess periodontal changes after anterior tooth movement vol.18, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0635-y
  2. Thickness of the buccal bone wall and root angulation in the maxilla and mandible: an approach to cone beam computed tomography vol.18, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0652-x
  3. Assessment of Periodontal Biotype in a Young Chinese Population using Different Measurement Methods vol.8, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-29542-z
  4. The dimensions of the facial alveolar bone at tooth sites with local pathologies: a retrospective cone-beam CT analysis vol.24, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03057-x
  5. The two‐dimensional size of peri‐implant soft tissue in the anterior maxilla and some relevance: A 1‐ to 7‐year cross‐sectional study vol.47, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13256
  6. 3D computer‐aided treatment planning in periodontology: A novel approach for evaluation and visualization of soft tissue thickness vol.32, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12614
  7. A Cross-Sectional Study of Labial Bone and Covering Soft Tissue in Maxillary Anterior Segment: A Dilemma in Orthodontics vol.2021, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5553301
  8. Correlation analysis of periodontal tissue dimensions in the esthetic zone using a non-invasive digital method vol.51, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2003460173
  9. Height difference between the vestibular and palatal walls and palatal width: a cone beam computed tomography approach vol.21, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-01322-0
  10. Evaluation of the association between gingival phenotype and alveolar bone thickness: A systematic review and meta-analysis vol.133, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2021.105287