Journal of Isfahan Dental School

Evaluation of the Relationship between Biologic Width and Gingival Biotype in Patients Referred to Periodontics Department of Dental Faculty of Tehran Islamic Azad University

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Authors

1 Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Resident of Periodontology, Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction: Prior to crown lengthening surgery and/or restorative and prosthetic treatment, it is necessary to know the dimensions of the tooth biologic width. In different studies, the biologic width has been measured in different sites and teeth with a healthy periodontium. In this study, the biologic width was measured in different teeth of the mandibular and maxillary arches, and the effect of periodontal/gingival biotype on biologic width was evaluated.Materials & Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed on 163 teeth in 12 subjects, including five males and seven females with an average age of 28 ± 4 years. After injecting the anesthetic agent, the dimensions of the biologic width were measured using a periodontal probe at six sites in all the existing teeth (except the third molars). Periodontal biotype was evaluated and categorized as thin or thick by observing transgingival shade of a probe. The data were analyzed with ANOVA and t-test using SPSS 19 (α = 0.05).Results: The average biologic widths in the molars, premolars, canines, and incisors were 1.90 ± 0.80, 1.72 ± 0.69, 155 ± 0.72, and 1.49±0.64, respectively. There was a significant relationship between the biologic width and the tooth type (p value = 0.000). However, there was no significant relationship between the biologic width and gingival biotype in six points and different sites of the mouth (p value > 0.08).Conclusion: The biologic width dimension varies in different tooth types. The periodontal biotype has no effect on the biologic width dimension.Key words: Epithelial attachment, Gingiva, Periodontium, Tooth-supporting structures.

1. Aishwarya M, Sivaram G. Biologic width: Concept and violation. J Res Dent Sci 2015; 6(4): 250-6.
2. Block PL. Restorative margins and periodontal health. A new look at on old perspective. J Prosthet Dent. 1987; 57(6): 683-9.
3. Spear FM. Maintenance of the interdental papilla following anterior tooth removal. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1999; 11(1): 21-8.
4. Waerhaug J. Effect of rough surfaces upon gingival tissue. J Dent Res 1956; 35(2): 323-5.
5. Padbury A Jr, Eber R, Wang HL. Interactions between the gingiva and the margin of restorations. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30(5): 379-85.
6. Perez JR, Smukler H, Nunn ME. Clinical dimensions of the supraosseous gingivae in healthy periodontium. J Periodontol 2008; 79(12): 2267-72.
7. Maynard JG Jr, Wilson RD. Physiologic dimension of the periodontium significanto to the restorative dentist. J Periodontol 1979; 50(4): 170-4.
8. Yeh S, Andreana S. Crown lengthening: basic principles, indications, techniques and clinical case reports. N Y State Dent J 2004; 70(8): 30-6.
9. Pontoriero R. Carnevale G. Surgical crown lengthening: a 12-month clinical wound healing study. J Periodontol 2001; 72(7): 841-8.
10. Easley JR. Methods of determining alveolar osseous form. J Periodontol 1967; 38(2): 112-8.
11. Lanning SK, Waldrop TC, Gunsolley JC, Maynard JG. Surgical crown lengthening: Evaluation of the biological width. J Periodontol 2003; 74(4): 468-74.
12. Hamasni FM, El Hajj F. Comparison of the clinical biologic width with the published standard histologic mean values. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2017; 7(5): 264-271.
13. Gargiulo AW, Wentz FM, Orban B. Dimentions and reations of the dentogingival gunction in humans. J Periodontics 1961; 32(3): 261-7.
14. Cohen B. A study of the periodontal epithelium. Br dent J 1962; 112: 55-68.
15. Vacek JS, Gher ME, Assad DA, Richardson AC, Giambarresi LI. The dimensions of the human dentogingival junction. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994; 14(2): 154-65.
16. Kokick V. esthetics and anterior tooth position. An orthodontic persopective. Par II: vertical position. J Esthet Dent 1993; 5(4): 174-8.
17. Kois JC. The restorative-periodontal interface: biological parameters. Periodontal 2000 1996; 11: 29-38.
18. Nagaraj KR, Savadi RC, Savadi AR, Reddy GTP, Dayalan SM, John J. Gingival biotype prosthodontic perspective. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2010; 10(1): 27-30.
19. Vanda KL, Savitha B. Thickness of gingival in association with age gander and dental arch location. J Clin Periodontol 2005; 32(7): 828-30.
20. Shad DS, Duseja S, Vaishnava K, Shab RP. Adaptation of gingival biotype in response to prosthetic rehabilitation. Adv Hum Biol 2017; 7(2): 85-8.
21. Ochsenbein C, Ross S. A reevaluation of osseous surgery. Dent Clin North Am 1969; 13(1): 87-102.
22. Lindhe J. Textbook of clinical periodontology. 2nd ed. Hoboken, N: John Wiley & Sons; 1991. p. 477-514.
23. Kan JYK, Rungcharassaeng K, Morimoto T, Lozada J. Facial gingival tissue stability after connective tissue graft with single immediate tooth replacement in the esthetic zone: Consecutive case report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 67(11 Suppl): 40-8.
24. Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Umezu K, Kois JC. Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: An evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants inhumans. J Periodontol 2003; 74(4): 557-62.
25. Harris RJ. A comparative study of root coverage obtained with guided tissue regeneration utilizing a bioabsorable membrane versus the connective tissue with partial- thickness double pedicle graft. J Periodontol 1997; 68(8): 779-90
26. Daly CH, Wheeler JB 3rd. The use of ultrasonicthickness measurement in the clinical evaluation of the oral soft tissue. Int Dent J 1971; 21(4): 418-29.
27. Müller HP, Schaller N, Eger T. Ultrasonic determination of thickness of masticatory mucosa: A methodologic study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999; 88(2): 248-53.
28. Gupta P, Jan SM, Behal R. Cone-beam computerized tomography as a novel non-invasive method to determine the palatal grafts thickness. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol 2014; 2(3):72-6.
29. Ueno D, Sekiguchi R, Morita M, Jayawardena A, Shinpo S, Sato J, et al. Palatal mucosal measurements in a Japanese population using cone-beam computed tomography. J Esthet Restor Dent 2014; 26(1): 48-58.
30. Fu JH, Yeh CY, Chan HL, Atarakis TN, Leong DJ, Wang HL. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. J Periodontol 2010; 81(4): 569-74.
31. Cook DR, Mealey BL, Verett RG, Mills MP, Noujeim ME, Lasho DJ, et al. Relationship between clinical periodontal biotype and labial plate thickness: an in vivo study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2011; 31(4): 345-54
32. 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(7): 654-7.
33. Goaslind GD, Robertson PB, Mahan CJ, Morrison WW, Olson JV. Thickness of facial gingiva. J Periodontol 1977; 48(12): 768-71.
34. 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(8): 570-7.
35. 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(3): 237-43.
36. Shariatmadar Ahmadi R, Tavasoli R, Sayar F, Ghaffari K, Sarlati F. Gingival thickness assessment: visual versus direct measurement. J Islam Dent Assoc Iran 2016, 28(4): 149-54. [In Persian].
37. Arora R, Narula SC, Sharma RK, Tewari S. Supracrestal gingival tissue. Assessing relation with periodontal biotype in a healthy periodontium. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013; 33(6): 763-71.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 16, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
June 2020
Pages 137-146