Gingival Thickness Assessment at Mandibular Incisors of Orthodontic Patients with Ultrasound and Cone-beam CT. A Cross-sectional Study.

Kloukos, Dimitrios; Kakali, Lydia; Koukos, George; Sculean, Anton; Stavropoulos, Andreas; Katsaros, Christos (2021). Gingival Thickness Assessment at Mandibular Incisors of Orthodontic Patients with Ultrasound and Cone-beam CT. A Cross-sectional Study. Oral health & preventive dentistry, 19(1), pp. 263-270. Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH 10.3290/j.ohpd.b1248965

[img]
Preview
Text
ohpd_2021_01_s0263.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY).

Download (449kB) | Preview

PURPOSE

To use and evaluate two methods for measuring gingival thickness (GT) at mandibular incisors of orthodontic patients and compare their performance in assessing periodontal anatomy through soft tissue thickness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The sample consisted of 40 consecutive adult orthodontic patients. GT was measured just before bracket placement at both central mandibular incisors, mid-facially on the buccal aspect, 2 mm apically to the free gingival margin with two methods: clinically with an ultrasound device (USD) and radiographically with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).

RESULTS

CBCT measurements were consistently higher than USD measurements, with the difference ranging from 0.13 mm to 0.21 mm. No statistically significant difference was noted between the repeated CBCT measurements at the right central incisor (bias = 0.05 mm; 95% CI = -0.01, 0.11; p = 0.104). Although the respective results for the left incisor statistically indicated that the measurements were not exactly replicated, the magnitude of the point estimate was small and not clinically significant (bias = 0.06 mm; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.11; p = 0.014). Small differences between CBCT measurements made by the 2 examiners at the left central incisor (bias = 0.06 mm; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.11; p = 0.014) were detected. However, this difference was minor and also not clinically significant. The respective analysis on the right incisor showed no statistically significant difference (bias = 0.05 mm; 95% CI = -0.01, 0.11; p = 0.246).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on reproducibility, CBCT imaging for gingival thickness assessment proved to be as reliable as ultrasound determination. However, CBCT consistently yielded higher values, albeit at a marginal level, than did the ultrasound device.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine > Department of Orthodontics
04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine > Department of Periodontology

UniBE Contributor:

Kloukos, Dimitrios; Sculean, Anton and Katsaros, Christos

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

1602-1622

Publisher:

Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH

Language:

English

Submitter:

Renate Imhof-Etter

Date Deposited:

25 May 2021 13:30

Last Modified:

25 May 2021 13:30

Publisher DOI:

10.3290/j.ohpd.b1248965

PubMed ID:

33881289

Uncontrolled Keywords:

cone-beam CT gingival phenotype periodontal tissue ultrasound

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/155993

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/155993

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback