Gingival Biotype Revisited-novel Classification and Assessment Tool
Overview
Affiliations
Objectives: To evaluate the relationship between gingival biotypes and gingival thickness based on probe transparency through the gingival margin and to assess the sensitivity of a novel classification method.
Material And Methods: Sixty adult Caucasian subjects were stratified by their gingival biotype (GB) as defined by the transparency of a prototype double-ended periodontal probe through the buccal gingival margin into "thin" (30 subjects), "moderate" (15 subjects), and "thick" (15 subjects) GB. Three additional parameters were also assessed: gingival thickness (GT), probing depth (PD), and gingival width (GW).
Results: Median GT was 0.43 mm (P 0.32; P 0.58) for thin, 0.74 mm (P 0.58; P 0.81) for moderate, and 0.83 mm (P 0.74; P 0.95) for thick GB, respectively. GT was statistically significant different for thin versus moderate and thin versus thick, respectively (Kruskal-Wallis test, p < 0.05; Dunn's test, thin versus moderate: p = 0.002; thin versus thick: p < 0.001; moderate versus thick: p = 0.089). GW was directly correlated with GT (Spearman correlation p < 0.01). The sensitivity of the new classification tool for diagnosing a thin GB was 91.3%. No adverse events or complications were reported.
Conclusion: GT differs significantly between the presented GB groups, hence, an alternative classification especially focusing on thin biotypes based on a modified periodontal probe might be advantageous. In addition, the presence of a thick gingiva is associated with a wide band of keratinized tissue.
Clinical Relevance: This clinical setting might to be useful to identify high-risk patients with a very thin biotype and, consequently, higher risk for gingival recession after dental treatments.
Yildirim Bolat S, Lutfioglu M Clin Oral Investig. 2025; 29(1):87.
PMID: 39856472 PMC: 11761086. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-024-06143-x.
Menezes K, Borges S, Medeiros I, Gomes G, Roncalli A, Gurgel B Braz Oral Res. 2024; 38:e111.
PMID: 39536202 PMC: 11552456. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0111.
Dos Santos K, Leles J, Roriz V, Leles C Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):13066.
PMID: 38844764 PMC: 11156962. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-58559-w.
Clinical decision and related factors influencing implant direction in the esthetic area.
Liu Y, Yuan Q Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2023; 41(5):512-520.
PMID: 37805675 PMC: 10580232. DOI: 10.7518/hxkq.2023.2023151.
Correlation between Gingival Thickness and Occurrence of Gingival Recession.
Koppolu P, Al Arabi A, Al Khayri M, Alfaraj F, Alsafwani W, Alhozaimi S J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2023; 15(Suppl 1):S495-S501.
PMID: 37654274 PMC: 10466527. DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_585_22.