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

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.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

266 since deposited on 25 May 2021
206 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item