Evaluating the Impacts of Some Etiologically Relevant Factors on Excessive Gingival Display

Çetin, Mehtap Bilgin; Sezgin, Yasemin; Akıncı, Seray; Bakırarar, Batuhan

doi:10.11607/prd.5475

Cited by 8 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…EGD etiology varies and includes both soft and hard tissue factors, such as hypermobile UL (HUL), altered passive eruption (APE), short upper lip (SUL), plaque‐/drug‐induced gingival enlargement, anterior dentoalveolar extrusion, and vertical maxillary excess 12,14,18 . Multiple coexisting etiologies often occur in EGD patients 17,19,20 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper lip characteristics and associated excessive gingival display etiologies in adults: Race and sex differences

Tatakis

Paramitha

et al. 2023

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThis cross‐sectional study aimed to examine upper lip (UL) and smile characteristics and soft tissue excessive gingival display (EGD) etiologies (hypermobile upper lip [HUL], altered passive eruption [APE], and short upper lip [SUL]) in a nondental adult population and to analyze interracial (Black and White) and intergender differences.MethodsCommunity participants, non‐Hispanic Blacks (NHB) and non‐Hispanic Whites (NHW), were recruited and examined for UL vertical dimensions at rest and maximum smile and for HUL, APE, and SUL. Associations between gingival display (GD) or EGD and UL anatomical characteristics, HUL, APE, and SUL were analyzed.ResultsParticipants included 66 NHB and 65 NHW adults. Ergotrid height (greater among NHW; p = 0.019) averaged 14.0 mm. Upper lip vermilion length (ULVL), total UL length, internal lip length, total UL length during smile, and UL mobility averaged 8.6, 22.5, 23.1, 16.6, and 5.9 mm, respectively (all significantly greater in NHB; p ≤ 0.012). SUL prevalence was 4.6%, found only among NHW. Lip length change from rest to smile (LLC) averaged 26.2% (significantly greater in females; p = 0.003). HUL prevalence was 10.7% (NHB 13.1%, NHW 3.5%; p = 0.024). NHB had significantly greater GD (p ≤ 0.017). EGD and APE prevalence (6.9% for both) showed significant interracial and intergender differences (p ≤ 0.014). Multivariate logistic regression analyses indicated that LLC and HUL were the most consistently significant EGD determinants.ConclusionsUL anatomical and functional characteristics and soft tissue‐related EGD etiologies exhibit significant interracial and intergender differences, with UL mobility/hypermobility being the most consistently significant determinant of GD.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper lip characteristics and associated excessive gingival display etiologies in adults: Race and sex differences

Tatakis

Paramitha

et al. 2023

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Excessive gingival display (EGD) when smiling is considered a nonaesthetic factor by dentists and laypersons alike. This condition is called gummy smile (GS), and it happens when individuals show 3 mm or more of gum during smiling 1–5 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…HUL is lip movement of 8 mm or more during a maximum smile. APE is a change in which part of the anatomical crown of the tooth is covered by gum tissue 3–9 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This condition is called gummy smile (GS), and it happens when individuals show 3 mm or more of gum during smiling. [1][2][3][4][5] GS is the consequence of etiological factors. The one most commonly found in cases of a gummy smile is hypermobility upper lip (HUL).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…APE is a change in which part of the anatomical crown of the tooth is covered by gum tissue. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] This case report describes the treatment of a patient diagnosed with GS caused by HUL and APE combined. Treatment included crown lengthening surgery (CLS), botulinum toxin application, and lip repositioning surgery modified with the insertion of polyester threads.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Treatment of gummy smile combining crown lengthening, lip repositioning, and the use of polyester threads

Horn

Joly

2022

Clin Adv Periodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:The case report presents a new possibility of treatment for a gummy smile in a patient with multiple etiologies, such as altered passive eruption and hypermobility upper lip. At first, crown lengthening was not sufficient to achieve the desired aesthetic result, being necessary its combination with lip repositioning. Case Presentation: Crown lengthening surgery (CLS) was performed in a 20year-old woman, with a gingival display of 7.5 mm, having her gingival exposure reduced to 5.5 mm. Because the patient continued unsatisfied after 6 months, a new procedure was adopted. To reduce even more her gingival exposure, lip repositioning technique was performed associated with myotomy and the insertion of polyester threads as a physical barrier to prevent relapse. Conclusion:The result of the gingival display was reduced to 2.5 mm, removing the condition of a gummy smile after the combination of both techniques: crown lengthening, and lip repositioning.

show abstract

Lip Repositioning Techniques and Modifications

Tatakis

2022

Dental Clinics of North America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating the Impacts of Some Etiologically Relevant Factors on Excessive Gingival Display

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

Upper lip characteristics and associated excessive gingival display etiologies in adults: Race and sex differences

Upper lip characteristics and associated excessive gingival display etiologies in adults: Race and sex differences

Treatment of gummy smile combining crown lengthening, lip repositioning, and the use of polyester threads

Lip Repositioning Techniques and Modifications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About