Comparison of gingival thickness by CBCT versus transgingival probing and estimation of cut-off values for gingival phenotype – A cross-sectional study in adults - 27/06/24
Summary |
Aim |
Gingival phenotype (GP) is regarded as a valuable indicator for forecasting the probability of attaining favourable aesthetic and functional results with orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to investigate the accuracy and reproducibility of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for assessing gingival thickness (GT) in both arches compared to the transgingival probing method. The secondary objective was to determine the optimal cut-off values for GT using CBCT.
Methods |
This cross-sectional study was conducted where GP was determined based on the probe transparency method (TRAN). The GT measurements were obtained by both methods at 2mm from the free gingival margin (FGM) for all teeth anterior to the first molar. The data was statistically analysed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland–Altman plots, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The statistical significance level was set at a P-value<0.05.
Results |
The study included 60 subjects (1200 teeth). The mean GT in both the maxillary (1.14±0.17mm) and mandibular (0.94±0.15mm) arches was significantly greater (P<0.05) for the transgingival probing method than for the CBCT method. As shown in the Bland–Altman plot, the bias between the two methods was greater in the maxillary jaw (0.060; 95% CI: 0.044 to 0.076) and in individuals with a thick GP (0.096; 95% CI: 0.082 to 0.109). The optimal values for GT measurements were 1.15mm for the maxillary jaw, 1.02mm for the mandibular jaw, 1.02mm for males, and 1.09mm for females.
Conclusions |
CBCT exhibited notable precision in diagnosing GT, while demonstrating minimal disparities compared to the conventional transgingival probing technique, particularly evident in thin GPs, and in the mandibular dental arch. The constraints associated with the utilization of CBCT were observed in the maxillary arch and in cases with thick GP.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Gingiva, Phenotype, Thickness, Cone beam computed tomography, Orthodontic
Plan
Vol 22 - N° 3
Article 100892- septembre 2024 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?