Assessing the gingival biotypes for better planning of esthetics in Indian population: A cross sectional study

J. Haritha; P. Anusha; K. V. Guru Charan Karthik; Lokesh Sunkala; Gajula Venu Madhav; Priyanka Rai

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v6nS2.8410

Authors

J. Haritha
jinkaharitha12@gmail.com
Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Private Practitioner, Proddatur, Kadapa dist., A.P.
P. Anusha Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Private Practitioner, Tirupathi, A.P.
K. V. Guru Charan Karthik Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Army College of Dental Science
Lokesh Sunkala Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Army College of Dental Sciences
Gajula Venu Madhav Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Army College of Dental Sciences
Priyanka Rai Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Army College of Dental Science

Keywords:

gingival biotype, papillary height, crown length, crown width

Abstract

Background: Anterior fixed prosthesis fabrication is a challenging one which involves many aspects and one among them which dictates the most is the gingiva. Any recession causes exposure of the tooth and prosthetic junction leading to esthetic failure. Hence it is important to know the biotypes before planning the restoration. Aim: To evaluate the prevalence of different gingival biotypes in individuals with relation to age, gender, tooth size and papillary height with respect to maxillary central incisors. Methods & Materials: A total of 200 subjects in the range of 18-50 years participated in the study. Three clinical parameters were recorded which included crown width & crown length ratio, papillary height and gingival transparency of two maxillary central incisors. The measurements were tabulated and statistically analyzed. Data was statistically analyzed using SSPS software. Results: The relationship of biotypes with clinical parameters was assessed using t test and chi square test. Thicker gingival biotype was more prevalent in male population with short, wider form of teeth whereas in females’ thin gingival biotypes with long and narrow teeth forms were observed. Conclusion: Both the young and old age groups have the same prevalence of thick gingival biotype.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aarthi S. Balasubramaniam, Sunitha V. Raja, and Libby John Thomas Periimplant esthetics assessment and management. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2013 ; 10(1): 7–14.

Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. Effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20(4):172-184.

Moskowitz ME, Nayyar A. Determinants of dental esthetics: A rationale for smile analysis and treatment. Compend Contin Edu Dent 1995; 16:1164-1166.

Meijer HJ, Stellingsma K, Mejindert L, Raghoebar GM. A new index for rating aesthetics of implant supported single crowns and adjacent soft tissues – the Implant Crown Aesthetic Index. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005; 16:645-649.

Ahmad I. Anterior dental esthetics: The gingival perspective. Br Dent J 2005; 199:195‑202.

Fu J, Lee A, Wang H. Influence of tissue biotype on implant esthetics. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26(3):499–508.

Seba AbrahamK.T. DeepakR. AmbiliC. PreejaV. Archana. Gingival biotype and its clinical significance – A review. The Saudi dental research journal 2014; 5: 3-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ksujds.2013.06.003

Anand V, Govila V, Gulati M. Correlation of gingival tissue biotypes with gender and tooth morphology: A randomized clinical study. Indian J Dent 2012; 3:190-5.

Ochsenbein C, Ross S. A reevaluation of osseous surgery. Dent Clin North Am. 1969;13(1):87-102.

Seibert JL, Lindhe J. Esthetics and periodontal therapy. In: Lindhe J, ed. Textbook of Clinical Periodontology, 2nd edition 1991, Copenhangen, Denmark: Munksgaard; wiley: 477-514.

Eghbali A, De Rouck T, De Bruyn H, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype assessed by experienced and inexperienced clinicians. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:958–963.

Cao J, Hu WJ, Zhang H, Liu DG, Le D. [Preliminary study on measuring interdental papilla height and thickness of the maxillary anterior teeth based on cone-beam computed tomography]. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2013 Oct;48(10):581-5. Chinese. PMID: 24438563.

Rossell J, Puigdollers A, Girabent-Farrés M. A simple method for measuring thickness of gingiva and labial bone of mandibular incisors. Quintessence Int. 2015 Mar;46(3):265-71. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a32919. PMID: 25328921.

Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, Roe P, Smith DH. Gingival biotype assessment is esthetic zone: Visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2010;30 :237‑43.

Olsson M, Lindhe J, Marinello CP. On relationship between crown form and clinical features of the gingival in adolescents. J Clin Periodontol 1993;20 :570‑7.

Cortellini P, Bissada NF. Mucogingival conditions in the natural dentition: narrative review, case definitions, and diagnostic considerations. J Periodontol 2018;89(Suppl 1):S204-S213.

Fu JH, Yeh CY, Chan HL, Tatarakis N, Leong DJ, Wang HL. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. JPeriodontol 2010;81:569-574.

Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, Roe P, Smith DH. Gingival biotype assessment is esthetic zone: Visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2010;30 :237‑43.

Olsson M, Lindhe J, Marinello CP. On relationship between crown form and clinical features of the gingival in adolescents. J Clin Periodontol 1993;20 :570‑7.

Eghbali A, DeRouck T, Bruyn H, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype assessed by experienced and inexperienced clinicians. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:958‑63.

De Rouck T, Eghbali R, Collys K, De Bruyn H, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype revisited: Transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:428- 33.

Chandulal D, Jayshri W. An assessment of different gingival biotypes in individuals with varying forms of maxillary central incisors and canines: A hospital-based study. Int J Oral Health Sci 2018;8:35-8.

Bhat V, Shetty S. Prevalence of different gingival biotypes in individuals with varying forms of maxillary central incisors: A survey. J Dent Implant 2013;3:116-21.

Agarwal V, Sunny, Mehrotra N, Vijay V. Gingival biotype assessment: Variations in gingival thickness with regard to age, gender, and arch location. Indian J Dent Sci . 2017;9(1):12–5. doi:10.4103/0976- 4003.201639.

Vandana KL, Savita B. Thickness of gingival in association with age, gender, and dental arch location. J Clin Periodontol 2005; 32:828-30.

Chang LC. The association between embrasure morphology and central pailla recessiom. J Clin Periodontol 2007; 34:432-6.

Becker W, Ochsenbein C. Tibbetts L, Becker BE. Alveolar bone anatomic profiles as measured from dry skulls. Clinical ramificatioms. J Clin Periodontol 1997;24:727-731.