Assessment of Gingival Thickness Using CBCT Compared to Transgingival Probing and Its Correlation with Labial Bone Defects: A Cross-Sectional Study

Khalifa, Mohamed El; Sadat, Shaimaa Mohamed Abu el; Gaweesh, Youssria; Gaweesh, Yasmine

doi:10.11607/jomi.9234

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They found that CBCT dimensions may be a more objective modality than direct measurements for defining the thickness of both soft and hard tissues. To investigate the thickness of the palatal mucosa, many studies have been carried out using transgingival probing, but only a few studies have been conducted that utilized soft tissue CBCT to assess the thickness of facial gingival tissue [4,8,26]. In this study, we evaluated the association between the thickness of the soft tissues of the teeth in the maxillary anterior region and the thickness of the gingival biotype, with the help of soft tissue CBCT and transgingival probing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Amongst the possible causes, it is noted that gingiva thickness is measured at various vertical levels. Previously, intrusive procedures were utilized to evaluate gingival thickness; direct measurement [26] was used but had several disadvantages, including an invasive approach, the lack of repeatability and precision, inappropriate angles, and the level of pressure. To circumvent such constraints, non-invasive approaches, such as ultrasonic devices [27] and cone-beam computed tomography [28], were developed; however, such modalities are technique-sensitive and have high costs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective: Gingival biotype can be assessed using a variety of invasive and non-invasive procedures, such as direct probing, transgingival probing, ultrasound-guided approaches, and, for the more sophisticated, cone-beam computed tomography. The aim of this study was to evaluate gingival biotype in relation to transgingival probing and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This study included a total of two hundred healthy individuals. Gingival thickness was assessed and measured from the right and left maxillary central incisor teeth using CBCT and transgingival probing of the attached gingiva. The measurements were analyzed with regard to tooth type (central incisor). Linear measurements for gingival biotype were measured using both methods. Correlations and differences between measurement methods were assessed. Results: The mean age of study participants was 32.49 ± 8.61 years. The radiographic measurements on CBCT were 1.34 ± 0.17 mm for the right central and 1.28 ± 0.21mm for the left central. The transgingival probing measurements were 1.31 ± 0.18 for the right central and 1.22 ± 0.21mm for the left central. Conclusion: As per the results of this study, there is a significant positive correlation between transgingival probing and CBCT measurements of gingival biotypes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The transgingival clinical measurement was performed as the gold standard measurement technique [ 14 , 27 ]. First, anesthetic gel containing 5% lidocaine (Xylonor, Septodont, Maidstone, UK) was applied using a sterile cotton swab.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Invasive methods include histopathological examination and transgingival probing [ 12 ]. Ultrasonography, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), and computed tomography (CT) are among the noninvasive techniques for the determination of gingival thickness [ 13 , 14 , 15 ]. The application of X-ray-based imaging modalities solely for the purpose of measuring gingival thickness can expose the patients to unnecessary radiation [ 16 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Evaluation of the Accuracy of Gingival Thickness Measurement by Clinical Evaluation and Intraoral Ultrasonography

Soltani,

Yaghini,

Rafiei

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of gingival thickness measurement by two methods of clinical evaluation and intraoral ultrasonography. The gingival thickness was measured in the midbuccal area of the right maxillary lateral incisor and first molar teeth in 30 individuals. For clinical measurement, a #15 K-file with rubber stops was vertically inserted 2 mm apical to the gingival margin and the length of the file in the tissue was measured using a digital caliper. Ultrasonographic measurement was performed using an intraoral probe on the gingival surface in the midbuccal area, at the entry point of the file. Statistical analysis was performed by paired t-test, correlation coefficient, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (α = 0.05). In the anterior region, the mean gingival thicknesses using ultrasonography (1.517 ± 0.293 mm) and clinical evaluation (1.610 ± 0.272 mm) were not significantly different (p = 0.434). In the posterior region, the mean gingival thicknesses were significantly different between ultrasonography (1.372 ± 0.442 mm) and clinical evaluation (1.626 ± 0.310 mm) (p = 0.006). The area under ROC curve values for ultrasonographic measurements in the anterior and posterior regions were 0.681 and 0.597, respectively. The use of ultrasonography with an intraoral probe has acceptable accuracy for the determination of gingival thickness, especially for the anterior regions.

show abstract

Current landmarks for gingival thickness evaluation in maxillary anterior teeth: a systematic review

Rodrigues¹,

Montez

Luz

et al. 2023

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessment of Gingival Thickness Using CBCT Compared to Transgingival Probing and Its Correlation with Labial Bone Defects: A Cross-Sectional Study

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Comparative Evaluation of the Accuracy of Gingival Thickness Measurement by Clinical Evaluation and Intraoral Ultrasonography

Current landmarks for gingival thickness evaluation in maxillary anterior teeth: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About