Subscribe to RSS
Clinical Evaluation of Gingival Thickness and Width according to Dental Arch and Location in Pigmented and Nonpigmented Gingiva
Introduction The present study aimed to clinically evaluate and compare the variations in gingival thickness and width of keratinized gingiva according to the dental arch and location in pigmented and nonpigmented gingiva.
Materials and Methods A total of 240 sites from systemically healthy subjects were selected and divided into two groups; Group 1(pigmented gingiva) and group 2 (nonpigmented gingiva). After the initial visit of scaling and root planning, the gingival thickness was evaluated mid-buccally in the attached gingiva, that is, the center of the mucogingival junction and free gingival groove, and at the base of the interdental papilla. Similarly, the gingival width was measured as the distance from the gingival margin to the mucogingival junction. A single calibrated examiner recorded the measurements using the digital vernier caliper with a resolution of 0.01 mm.
Results Gingival thickness and width were found to be significantly higher in pigmented than nonpigmented gingiva. Also, the maxillary arch was found to have thicker and wider gingiva than the mandibular arch in both the groups. The gingival thickness was found to be maximum in central incisor and minimum in canine in both the groups. However, the width of keratinized gingiva was found to be maximum in lateral incisor in group 1 (pigmented) and central incisor in group 2 (nonpigmented) and minimum in canine in both the groups.
Conclusion A significant positive correlation in gingival thickness and width was observed according to dental arch and location in both pigmented and nonpigmented gingiva.
29 October 2020 (online)
© 2020. Bhojia Dental College and Hospital affiliated to Himachal Pradesh University. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
- 1 Claffey N, Shanley D. Relationship of gingival thickness and bleeding to loss of probing attachment in shallow sites following nonsurgical periodontal therapy. J Clin Periodontol 1986; 13 (07) 654-657
- 2 Zigdon H, Machtei EE. The dimensions of keratinized mucosa around implants affect clinical and immunological parameters. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19 (04) 387-392
- 3 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 (05) 428-433
- 4 Malhotra R, Grover V, Bhardwaj A, Mohindra K. Analysis of the gingival biotype based on the measurement of the dentopapillary complex. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2014; 18 (01) 43-47
- 5 Joshi N, Agarwal MC, Madan E, Gupta S, Law A. Gingival biotype and gingival bioform: determining factors for periodontal disease progression and treatment outcome. Int J Sci Stud 2016; 4 (03) 220-225
- 6 Manjunath RG, Rana A, Sarkar A. Gingival biotype assessment in a healthy periodontium: transgingival probing method. J Clin Diagn Res 2015; 9 (05) ZC66-ZC69
- 7 Ainamo J, Bay I. Problems and proposals for recording gingivitis and plaque. Int Dent J 1975; 25 (04) 229-235
- 8 Tasneem S, Venugopal K, Ravishankar PL, Chakraborty P, Kandukuri VG, Saravanan AV. Determining the gingival biotype based on dentopapillary compound. J Int Clin Dent Res Organ 2018; 10 (01) 37
- 9 Shah DS, Duseja S, Vaishnav K, Shah RP. Adaptation of gingival biotype in response to prosthetic rehabilitation. Adv Hum Biol 2017; 7 (02) 85
- 10 Kolte R, Kolte A, Mahajan A. Assessment of gingival thickness with regards to age, gender and arch location. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2014; 18 (04) 478-481
- 11 Bharamappa R, Laxman VK. Comparative assessment of gingival thickness in pigmented and nonpigmented gingiva. J Int Clin Dent Res Organ 2013; 5 (01) 19
- 12 Müller HP, Heinecke A, Schaller N, Eger T. Masticatory mucosa in subjects with different periodontal phenotypes. J Clin Periodontol 2000; 27 (09) 621-626
- 13 Vandana KL, Savitha B. Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location. J Clin Periodontol 2005; 32 (07) 828-830
- 14 Müller HP, Eger T. Gingival phenotypes in young male adults. J Clin Periodontol 1997; 24 (01) 65-71
- 15 Medina Coeli Egreja A, Kahn S, Barceleiro M, Bittencourt S. Relationship between the width of the zone of keratinized tissue and thickness of gingival tissue in the anterior maxilla. Int J Perio Rest Dent 2012; 32 (05) x
- 16 Bowers GM. A study of the width of attached gingiva. J Periodontol 1963; 34 (03) 201-209
- 17 Vandana KL, Shivani S, Savitha B, Vivek HP. Assessment of gingival sulcus depth, width of attached gingiva, and gingival thickness in primary, mixed, and permanent dentition. J Dent Res Rev 2017; 4 (02) 42