Comparison of gingival thickness by CBCT versus transgingival probing and estimation of cut-off values for gingival phenotype – A cross-sectional study in adults
Seema Gupta , Amit Kumar Mendiratta , Mubasshir Ahmed Shaikh , Hibu Dora , Salim Shamsuddin , Sameena Begum Maqhbool
{"title":"Comparison of gingival thickness by CBCT versus transgingival probing and estimation of cut-off values for gingival phenotype – A cross-sectional study in adults","authors":"Seema Gupta , Amit Kumar Mendiratta , Mubasshir Ahmed Shaikh , Hibu Dora , Salim Shamsuddin , Sameena Begum Maqhbool","doi":"10.1016/j.ortho.2024.100892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>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.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>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 2<!--> <!-->mm 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 <em>P</em>-value<!--> <!--><<!--> <!-->0.05.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The study included 60 subjects (1200 teeth). The mean GT in both the maxillary (1.14<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0.17<!--> <!-->mm) and mandibular (0.94<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0.15<!--> <!-->mm) arches was significantly greater (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->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 1.15<!--> <!-->mm for the maxillary jaw, 1.02<!--> <!-->mm for the mandibular jaw, 1.02<!--> <!-->mm for males, and 1.09<!--> <!-->mm for females.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>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.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45449,"journal":{"name":"International Orthodontics","volume":"22 3","pages":"Article 100892"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1761722724000482","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
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 2 mm 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 ± 0.17 mm) and mandibular (0.94 ± 0.15 mm) 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 1.15 mm for the maxillary jaw, 1.02 mm for the mandibular jaw, 1.02 mm for males, and 1.09 mm 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.
期刊介绍：
Une revue de référence dans le domaine de orthodontie et des disciplines frontières Your reference in dentofacial orthopedics International Orthodontics adresse aux orthodontistes, aux dentistes, aux stomatologistes, aux chirurgiens maxillo-faciaux et aux plasticiens de la face, ainsi quà leurs assistant(e)s. International Orthodontics is addressed to orthodontists, dentists, stomatologists, maxillofacial surgeons and facial plastic surgeons, as well as their assistants.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
