Non-invasive Evaluation of Labial Gingival and Alveolar Crest Thickness in the Maxillary Anterior Teeth Region by 15-MHz B-mode Ultrasonography

Overview

Journal BMC Oral Health

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2021 Jan 7

PMID 33407377

Citations 6

Authors

Meng Sun

Xiaofeng Liu

Ting Xia

He Meng

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Knowledge of gingival thickness (GT) and alveolar crest thickness (ACT) is essential when performing surgical and non-surgical procedures in the maxillary anterior teeth region. This study aimed at evaluating the GT and ACT in the maxillary anterior teeth region using 15-MHz B-mode Ultrasonic (US).

Methods: A total of 300 teeth from 50 healthy participants, comprising 25 women and 25 men, aged between 18 and 35 years were analyzed. We measured labial periodontal tissue structures of maxillary anterior teeth, including GT and ACT, at 3 mm apical to the gingival margin (GT3) and the crestal level, respectively. The GT and ACT measurements were correlated.

Results: The mean labial GT3 of the maxillary central incisors, lateral incisors, and canines were 1.24 ± 0.03 mm, 1.21 ± 0.03 mm and 1.11 ± 0.03 mm, respectively. Canine GT3 was significantly thin than those in the central and lateral incisors (P < 0.05). With regards to labial ACT, we recorded 0.79 ± 0.03 mm, 0.76 ± 0.02 mm and 0.73 ± 0.02 mm for maxillary central incisors, lateral incisors and canines, respectively. There were no significant differences in ACT of maxillary anterior teeth (P > 0.05). GT3 of men was greater than that of women (P < 0.05). In addition, GT and ACT were positively correlated (r = 0.32, P < 0.01).

Conclusion: 15-MHz B-mode US is an effective tool for measuring labial GT and ACT of anterior teeth. There are sex-associated differences in GT3 and the correlation between the GT3 and ACT of anterior teeth is moderately positive.

Citing Articles

Clinical efficacy of intraoral ultrasonography versus transgingival probing for measurement of gingival thickness in different gingival biotypes: a clinical trial.

Alizad-Rahvar M, Safi Y, Kadkhodazadeh M, Ghomashi M Head Face Med. 2024; 20(1):23.

PMID: 38566169 PMC: 10985878. DOI: 10.1186/s13005-024-00422-4.

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

Soltani P, Yaghini J, Rafiei K, Mehdizadeh M, Armogida N, Esposito L J Clin Med. 2023; 12(13).

PMID: 37445430 PMC: 10342935. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12134395.

The use of shear wave elastography to monitor changes in gingival elasticity associated with initial periodontal therapy in patients with advanced periodontitis: A prospective pilot study.

Xue F, Wu B, Zhang R, Li N, Sun F J Dent Sci. 2023; 18(3):1086-1093.

PMID: 37404603 PMC: 10316436. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2022.11.014.

Overview of Ultrasound in Dentistry for Advancing Research Methodology and Patient Care Quality with Emphasis on Periodontal/Peri-implant Applications.

Betancourt A, Samal A, Chan H, Kripfgans O Z Med Phys. 2023; 33(3):336-386.

PMID: 36922293 PMC: 10517409. DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2023.01.005.

Ultrasound Imaging of the Periodontium Complex: A Reliability Study.

Figueredo C, Le L, Nguyen K, La T, Lou E, Kaipatur N Int J Dent. 2023; 2023:5494429.

PMID: 36845629 PMC: 9949946. DOI: 10.1155/2023/5494429.

References

Kim Y, Park J, Kim S, Koo K, Seol Y, Lee Y . New method of assessing the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2017; 46(6):372-381. PMC: 5200863. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2016.46.6.372. View

Eger T, Muller H, Heinecke A . Ultrasonic determination of gingival thickness. Subject variation and influence of tooth type and clinical features. J Clin Periodontol. 1996; 23(9):839-45. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1996.tb00621.x. View

Chan H, Sinjab K, Chung M, Chiang Y, Wang H, Giannobile W . Non-invasive evaluation of facial crestal bone with ultrasonography. PLoS One. 2017; 12(2):e0171237. PMC: 5298227. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171237. View

Fu J, Yeh C, Chan H, Tatarakis N, Leong D, Wang H . Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. J Periodontol. 2010; 81(4):569-74. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2009.090591. View

Alhajj W . Gingival phenotypes and their relation to age, gender and other risk factors. BMC Oral Health. 2020; 20(1):87. PMC: 7093957. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01073-y. View

Fourie Z, Damstra J, Gerrits P, Ren Y . Accuracy and reliability of facial soft tissue depth measurements using cone beam computer tomography. Forensic Sci Int. 2010; 199(1-3):9-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.02.018. View

Eghbali A, De Rouck T, De Bruyn H, Cosyn J . The gingival biotype assessed by experienced and inexperienced clinicians. J Clin Periodontol. 2009; 36(11):958-63. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01479.x. View

Stein J, 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(12):1132-9. DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12169. View

Huynh-Ba G, Pjetursson B, Sanz M, Cecchinato D, Ferrus J, Lindhe J . Analysis of the socket bone wall dimensions in the upper maxilla in relation to immediate implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010; 21(1):37-42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01870.x. View

10.

Procopio O, Trojan D, Frigo A, Paolin A . Use of homologous bone for alveolar crest reconstruction in 483 patients with 5 years' outcomes post implantation. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019; 23(3):353-363. PMC: 6689316. DOI: 10.1007/s10006-019-00781-2. View

11.

Nasseh I, Al-Rawi W . Cone Beam Computed Tomography. Dent Clin North Am. 2018; 62(3):361-391. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2018.03.002. View

12.

Hong C, Lee J, Choi J, Joo J . Prediction of the alveolar bone level after the extraction of maxillary anterior teeth with severe periodontitis. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2016; 45(6):216-22. PMC: 4698948. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2015.45.6.216. View

13.

Fu J, Lee A, Wang H . Influence of tissue biotype on implant esthetics. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26(3):499-508. View

14.

Stipetic J, Hrala Z, celebic A . Thickness of masticatory mucosa in the human hard palate and tuberosity dependent on gender and body mass index. Coll Antropol. 2005; 29(1):243-7. View

15.

Amid R, Mirakhori M, Safi Y, Kadkhodazadeh M, Namdari M . Assessment of gingival biotype and facial hard/soft tissue dimensions in the maxillary anterior teeth region using cone beam computed tomography. Arch Oral Biol. 2017; 79:1-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2017.02.021. View

16.

Kolte R, Kolte A, Mahajan A . Assessment of gingival thickness with regards to age, gender and arch location. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2014; 18(4):478-81. PMC: 4158590. DOI: 10.4103/0972-124X.138699. View

17.

Wara-Aswapati N, Pitiphat W, Chandrapho N, Rattanayatikul C, Karimbux N . Thickness of palatal masticatory mucosa associated with age. J Periodontol. 2001; 72(10):1407-12. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1407. View

18.

Aguilar-Duran L, Mir-Mari J, Figueiredo R, Valmaseda-Castellon E . Is measurement of the gingival biotype reliable? Agreement among different assessment methods. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2019; 25(1):e144-e149. PMC: 6982987. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.23280. View

19.

Sharma S, Thakur S, Joshi S, Kulkarni S . Measurement of gingival thickness using digital vernier caliper and ultrasonographic method: a comparative study. J Investig Clin Dent. 2013; 5(2):138-43. DOI: 10.1111/jicd.12026. View

20.

Schapher M, Goncalves M, Mantsopoulos K, Iro H, Koch M . Transoral Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Obstructive Salivary Gland Pathologies. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2019; 45(9):2338-2348. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.05.019. View