Gingival thickness assessment at the mandibular incisors with four methods: A cross-sectional study

被引:65
作者
Kloukos, D. [1 ,2 ]
Koukos, G. [2 ]
Doulis, I [3 ]
Sculean, A. [4 ]
Stavropoulos, A. [5 ]
Katsaros, C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bern, Sch Dent Med, Dept Orthodont & Dentofacial Orthoped, Bern, Switzerland
[2] 251 Hellen Air Force & VA Gen Hosp, Athens, Greece
[3] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Fac Dent, Sch Hlth Sci, Dept Orthodont, Thessaloniki, Greece
[4] Univ Bern, Sch Dent Med, Dept Periodontol, Bern, Switzerland
[5] Malmo Univ, Fac Odontol, Dept Periodontol, Malmo, Sweden
关键词
gingival biotype; periodontal tissue; ultrasound; orthodontic; ULTRASONIC DETERMINATION; PERIODONTAL BIOTYPE; IMPLANT DENTISTRY; TISSUE BIOTYPE; RESTORATIONS; DIMENSIONS; MAXILLARY;
D O I
10.1002/JPER.18-0125
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Background: This study was conducted to determine accuracy, precision and repeatability of four different methods for assessing gingival thickness Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated gingival thickness on 200 consecutively included orthodontic patients. Gingival thickness was assessed at both central mandibular incisors with: 1) transgingival probing with a standard periodontal probe, 2) transgingival probing with a stainless-steel acupuncture needle, 3) ultrasound, and 4) a color-coded periodontal probe. Intra-examiner reproducibility and method error were also evaluated. Results: Transgingival measurements with the standard periodontal probe were found to be more accurate than those with the acupuncture needle, after method error assessment. Acupuncture needle and ultrasound device yielded higher values than the probe. Expected differences between the two methods were 22% more for the mandibular left central incisor (95% confidence interval (CI) = 11% to 32%) and 26% more (95% CI = 13% to 39%) for the mandibular right central incisor when measured with the needle. Ultrasound measurements exceeded probe measurements on average by 0.16 mm at mandibular left central incisor (95% CI = 0.14 to 0.18) and by 0.11 mm for mandibular right central incisor (95% CI = 0.08 to 0.13). Intraclass correlation coefficient concluded good agreement for the color-coded periodontal probe (0.624). Conclusions: Within the inherent limit of the uncertainty about the true value of gingival thickness, the present results demonstrate the differences between the tested methods, as far as accuracy and reproducibility are concerned. Based on the reproducibility, the transgingival probing with the periodontal probe as well as the ultrasound determination, seem to present an adequate choice for every day practice.
引用
收藏
页码:1300 / 1309
页数:10
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   GINGIVA THICKNESS IN GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION AND ASSOCIATED RECESSION AT FACIAL FURCATION DEFECTS [J].
ANDEREGG, CR ;
METZLER, DG ;
NICOLL, BK .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 1995, 66 (05) :397-402
[2]   Coronally advanced flap procedure for root coverage. Is flap thickness a relevant predictor to achieve root coverage? A 19-case series [J].
Baldi, C ;
Pini-Prato, G ;
Pagliaro, U ;
Nieri, M ;
Saletta, D ;
Muzzi, L ;
Cortellini, P .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 1999, 70 (09) :1077-1084
[3]   Use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Implant Dentistry: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists Consensus Report [J].
Benavides, Erika ;
Rios, Hector F. ;
Ganz, Scott D. ;
An, Chang-Hyeon ;
Resnik, Randolph ;
Reardon, Gayle Tieszen ;
Feldman, Steven J. ;
Mah, James K. ;
Hatcher, David ;
Kim, Myung-Jin ;
Sohn, Dong-Seok ;
Palti, Ady ;
Perel, Morton L. ;
Judy, Kenneth W. M. ;
Misch, Carl E. ;
Wang, Hom-Lay .
IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2012, 21 (02) :78-86
[4]   Applying the right statistics: analyses of measurement studies [J].
Bland, JM ;
Altman, DG .
ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2003, 22 (01) :85-93
[5]  
Bland JM, 1999, STAT METHODS MED RES, V8, P135, DOI 10.1177/096228029900800204
[6]  
Boke Fatma, 2014, Eur J Dent, V8, P373, DOI 10.4103/1305-7456.137651
[7]  
Cook DR, 2011, INT J PERIODONT REST, V31, P345
[8]   Gingival Biotype Assessement: Visual Inspection Relevance And Maxillary Versus Mandibular Comparison [J].
Cuny-Houchmand, Madline ;
Renaudin, Stephane ;
Leroul, Mustapha ;
Planche, Lucie ;
Le Guehennec, Laurent ;
Soueidan, Assem .
OPEN DENTISTRY JOURNAL, 2013, 7 :1-6
[9]   The gingival biotype revisited: transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva [J].
De Rouck, Tim ;
Eghbali, Rouhollah ;
Collys, Kristiaan ;
De Bruyn, Hugo ;
Cosyn, Jan .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 2009, 36 (05) :428-433
[10]   How to report reliability in orthodontic research: Part 1 [J].
Donatelli, Richard E. ;
Lee, Shin-Jae .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2013, 144 (01) :156-161