Assessment of palatal mucosal thickness and location of the greater palatine foramen using cone-beam computed tomography: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to measure the palatal mucosal thickness and examine the location of the greater palatine foramen using cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT). METHODS: In this study, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of the maxillary posterior region of 120 subjects were evaluated. The palatal mucosal thickness (PMT), palatal width and depth, and location of the greater palatine foramen (GPF) were determined on CBCT. The differences in the palatal mucosal thickness according to gender and palatal width/palatal depth were analyzed. The location of the GPF related to the maxillary molars was noted. RESULTS: The mean palatal mucosal thicknesses from the canine to the second molar teeth were 3.66, 3.90, 4.06, 3.76, and 3.92 mm, respectively. The mean PMT at the second premolar was statistically thicker than at other regions (p < 0,001). There was no relationship between PMT and gender. However, the palatal depth and width of the males were greater than females. (p = 0.004 and p = 0.014, respectively) PMT in the low palatal vault group had statistically higher compared to the high palatal vault group. (p = 0.023) Greater palatine foramen was mostly observed between second and third molar teeth. (48%). CONCLUSIONS: According to our results, first and second premolar regions can be preferable in soft tissue grafting procedures for safe and successful treatment outcomes. The measurement of the thickness of the palatal mucosa and the evaluation of the greater palatine foramen location before the surgical procedures are essential steps to harvest from the ideal donor site and to achieve optimal surgical outcomes.

Assessment of gingival thickness in the maxillary anterior region using different techniques.

OBJECTIVES: Gingival phenotype is closely related to treatment success and aesthetic results in the maxillary anterior region. Several methods were proposed to measure the dimensions of the gingival tissue. This study aimed to evaluate the gingival thickness using clinical and radiographic techniques and to explore the association between gingival thickness and gingival phenotypes classified by color-coded phenotype probes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The gingival thickness of 86 periodontally healthy maxillary anterior teeth was assessed using transgingival probing (TGP) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). The gingival phenotype was classified as thin, medium, thick, or very thick by transparency of the color-coded probes through the gingival sulcus. The labial alveolar bone thickness was measured on CBCT images. The keratinized tissue width (KTW) was recorded. RESULTS: Good to excellent agreement was found between TGP and CBCT regarding the thickness of the gingiva (p<0.001). There was a very high correlation between the phenotypes determined by color-coded probes and the gingival thickness measured by TGP (r=0.953, p<0.001). KTW was significantly higher in thick and very thick phenotype groups compared with thin phenotype group. CONCLUSION: Cone-beam computed tomography images and the probe transparency method with color-coded probes are reliable for identifying the gingival phenotype in the maxillary anterior region, based on comparisons to direct transgingival probing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The assessment of the gingival phenotype is essential, especially in the aesthetic zone, to obtain predictable and favorable clinical outcomes in various dental procedures. The newly introduced color-coded probes comprise a non-invasive and reliable method for this.