ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE@#To evaluate the gingival thickness and gingival biotype of gingival recession teeth of Chinese population.@*METHODS@#A total of 112 non-molar teeth with gingival recession in 34 patients were included. Direct measurement, cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) measurement and periodontal probe method were used to evaluate gingival thickness and biotype. Gingival thickness was measured at 2 mm apical to the gingival margin. Direct measurement was performed with a caliper of 0.01 mm resolution and anesthesia needles attached to silicone disk stops. Gingival biotype was assessed by sulcus probing, if the periodontal probe was visible through the gingival tissue, the gingival biotype was thin; If not visible, the gingival biotype was thick. The differences of gingival thickness among different gingival biotype, tooth site and gingival recession type were analyzed respectively. Besides, the results of CBCT measurement was analyzed compared with the direct measurement.@*RESULTS@#The average gingival thickness of non-molar recession teeth was (1.17±0.41) mm. The average gingival thickness of thick and thin biotype group were (1.38±0.4) mm and (0.97±0.30) mm, respectively, with statistically significant difference (P<0.001). The median of gingival thickness was 1.1 mm. Using 1.1 mm as the cut-off value of thick and thin gingival thickness group, the results matched well with the gingival biotype classification results by periodontal probe method (P=1.000). The average gingival thickness of maxillary teeth was significantly thicker than that of the mandibular teeth. They were (1.39±3.44) mm and (1.01±0.31) mm, respectively (P<0.001). The mean gingival thickness of MillerI, II and III degree gingival recession teeth were (1.15±0.34) mm, (0.83±0.17) mm and (1.26±0.56) mm, respectively, without statistically significant difference (P=0.205). The gingival thickness measurement results between CBCT method and direct measurement were without statistically significant difference (P=0.206).@*CONCLUSION@#In the non-molar gingival recession teeth, the cut-off value of gingival thickness to classify thick and thin biotype of Chinese population was 1.1 mm. The average gingival thickness of the maxillary teeth was significantly thicker than that of the mandibular teeth. Besides, CBCT measurement was an accuracy method for evaluating facial gingival thickness.
Subject(s)
Humans , Cone-Beam Computed Tomography , Gingiva , Gingival Recession , Incisor , MaxillaABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE@#To evaluate the clinical outcomes of vestibular incision subperiosteal tunnel access (VISTA) with connective tissue graft (CTG) in the treatment of Miller classes I and II localized gingival recession.@*METHODS@#Ten patients with 10 Miller classes I and II localized gingival recessions were enrolled in the study. All defects were equal to or above 2 mm in recession depth. All the patients received treatment with VISTA+CTG. Their clinical parameters, including recession depth (Rec), recession width (RW), keratinized tissue width (KT), clinical attachment loss (CAL), probing depth (PD) were recorded and compared before surgery and 6 months later. The mean root coverage (MRC) and complete root coverage (CRC) were calculated at the end of 6 months. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to estimate the patients' discomfort during the operation and during the 2 weeks post-operation. Patient-based aesthetic satisfaction 6 months after surgery was evaluated by a VAS.@*RESULTS@#The mean Rec was (2.65±0.82) mm at baseline, and (0.35±0.58) mm after 6 months. The VISTA+CTG treatment resulted in an improvement of (2.30±0.98) mm in recession depth (P<0.001). MRC was 86.67%±21.94% and CRC reached 70% at the end of 6 months. KT increased (0.90±1.22) mm (P<0.05). Aesthetic satisfaction on the patients' level was 8.30 based on VAS (0=unsatisfied, 10=extremely satisfied). The patients' discomfort during the operation and 2 weeks post operation were 2.40 and 4.30 (0=no pain, 10=extreme pain). Furthermore, clinical outcomes showed no statistically significant difference between the gingival biotypes, and between the teeth positioned in maxillary and in mandibular.@*CONCLUSION@#VISTA+CTG could be an effective treatment for Miller classes I and II localized gingival recession. Clinical outcomes indicated decrease in recession depth and width, and increase in width of keratinized tissue. Patients suffered little pain during the operation and 2 weeks post-operation of healing and accessed good aesthetic satisfaction. VISTA+CTG could be an option for the treatment of Miller classes I and II localized gingival recession.