The gingival biotype revisited: transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva.

AIM To detect groups of subjects in a sample of 100 periodontally healthy volunteers with different combinations of morphometric data related to central maxillary incisors and surrounding soft tissues. MATERIAL AND METHODS Four clinical parameters were included in a cluster analysis: crown width/crown length ratio (CW/CL), gingival width (GW), papilla height (PH) and gingival thickness (GT). The latter was based on the transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin while probing the buccal sulcus. Every first volunteer out of 10 was re-examined to evaluate intra-examiner repeatability for all variables. RESULTS High agreement between duplicate recordings was found for all parameters, in particular for GT, pointing to 85% (kappa=0.70; p=0.002). The partitioning method identified three clusters with specific features. Cluster A1 (nine males, 28 females) displayed a slender tooth form (CW/CL=0.79), a GW of 4.92 mm, a PH of 4.29 mm and a thin gingiva (probe visible on one or both incisors in 100% of the subjects). Cluster A2 (29 males, five females) presented similar features (CW/CL=0.77; GW=5.2 mm; PH=4.54 mm), except for GT. These subjects showed a clear thick gingiva (probe concealed on both incisors in 97% of the subjects). The third group (cluster B: 12 males, 17 females) differed substantially from the other clusters in many parameters. These subjects showed a more quadratic tooth form (CW/CL=0.88), a broad zone of keratinized tissue (GW=5.84 mm), low papillae (PH=2.84 mm) and a thick gingiva (probe concealed on both incisors in 83% of the subjects). CONCLUSIONS The present analysis, using a simple and reproducible method for GT assessment, confirmed the existence of gingival biotypes. A clear thin gingiva was found in about one-third of the sample in mainly female subjects with slender teeth, a narrow zone of keratinized tissue and a highly scalloped gingival margin corresponding to the features of the previously introduced "thin-scalloped biotype" (cluster A1). A clear thick gingiva was found in about two-thirds of the sample in mainly male subjects. About half of them showed quadratic teeth, a broad zone of keratinized tissue and a flat gingival margin corresponding to the features of the previously introduced "thick-flat biotype" (cluster B). The other half could not be classified as such. These subjects showed a clear thick gingiva with slender teeth, a narrow zone of keratinized tissue and a high gingival scallop (cluster A2).

[1]  H. Müller,et al.  Variance components of gingival thickness. , 2005, Journal of periodontal research.

[2]  H. Müller,et al.  Gingival phenotypes in young male adults. , 1997, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[3]  C R Anderegg,et al.  Gingiva thickness in guided tissue regeneration and associated recession at facial furcation defects. , 1995, Journal of periodontology.

[4]  R. Kao,et al.  Thick vs. thin gingival biotypes: a key determinant in treatment planning for dental implants. , 2008, Journal of the California Dental Association.

[5]  W. Becker,et al.  Alveolar bone anatomic profiles as measured from dry skulls. Clinical ramifications. , 1997, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[6]  Stephen T. Chen,et al.  Esthetic outcomes of immediate implant placements. , 2007, Clinical oral implants research.

[7]  A. Heinecke,et al.  Thickness of masticatory mucosa. , 2000, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[8]  Weisgold As Contours of the full crown restoration. , 1977 .

[9]  J. Lindhe,et al.  On the relationship between crown form and clinical features of the gingiva in adolescents. , 1993, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[10]  Daly Ch,et al.  The use of ultra-sonic thickness measurement in the clinical evaluation of the oral soft tissues. , 1971 .

[11]  Maurice K. Wong,et al.  Algorithm AS136: A k-means clustering algorithm. , 1979 .

[12]  A. Heinecke,et al.  Ultrasonic determination of gingival thickness. Subject variation and influence of tooth type and clinical features. , 1996, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[13]  A. Heinecke,et al.  Masticatory mucosa in subjects with different periodontal phenotypes. , 2000, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[14]  J. A. Hartigan,et al.  A k-means clustering algorithm , 1979 .

[15]  K L Vandana,et al.  Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location. , 2005, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[16]  J. Lindhe,et al.  Periodontal characteristics in individuals with varying form of the upper central incisors. , 1991, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[17]  Kitichai Rungcharassaeng,et al.  Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: an evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants in humans. , 2003, Journal of periodontology.

[18]  M. Nieri,et al.  Coronally advanced flap procedure for root coverage. Is flap thickness a relevant predictor to achieve root coverage? A 19-case series. , 1999, Journal of periodontology.

[19]  M. Chiapasco,et al.  Surgical and prosthetic management of interproximal region with single-implant restorations: 1-year prospective study. , 2008, Journal of periodontology.

[20]  G Carnevale,et al.  Surgical crown lengthening: a 12-month clinical wound healing study. , 2001, Journal of periodontology.