Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
https://revodontolunesp.com.br/article/doi/10.1590/1807-2577.01119
Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
Original Article

Distribuição das características clínicas do fenótipo gengival em pacientes saudáveis

Distribution of clinical characteristics of gingival phenotype in healthy patients

Samuel Batista BORGES; Lidya Nara Marques de ARAÚJO; Bruno César de Vasconcelos GURGEL

Downloads: 0
Views: 39

Resumo

Resumo: Introdução: A determinação do fenótipo gengival possibilita compreender melhor as variações e diferenças clínicas intra e interindividuais dos tecidos periodontais saudáveis.

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo foi determinar os perfis do fenótipo gengival e compará-los em diferentes regiões da cavidade oral, levando em consideração parâmetros clínicos relacionados aos tecidos moles circunjacentes nos dentes anteriores superiores e inferiores.

Material e método: Noventa e um pacientes com saúde ​​periodontal foram examinados e os parâmetros clínicos profundidade de sondagem (PS), largura de mucosa ceratinizada (MC), espessura gengival em ambos incisivos centrais superiores (EG) e fenótipo gengival (FG) foram coletados nos dentes anteriores superiores e inferiores. Os dados foram analisados ​​estatisticamente pelos testes t-Student pareado e independente, Correlação de Pearson e Qui-quadrado, com um nível de significância de 5%.

Resultado: O fenótipo gengival espesso predominou nos dentes anteriores superiores (60,5%), enquanto o fenótipo fino foi mais prevalente nos dentes anteriores inferiores (84,6%). Diferenças estatisticamente significativas foram encontradas para os parâmetros largura de mucosa ceratinizada e espessura gengival em relação aos fenótipos gengivais superiores e inferiores (p<0,05). Não houve diferença estatística entre profundidade de sondagem e o fenótipo gengival nos dentes superiores e inferiores.

Conclusão: Concluiu-se que o fenótipo gengival espesso é mais frequente nos dentes anteriores superiores e que o fenótipo fino é mais comum nos dentes anteriores inferiores, sendo mais frequente em indivíduos do sexo masculino. Os parâmetros largura de mucosa ceratinizada e espessura gengival mostraram-se adequados à determinação do fenótipo gengival.

Palavras-chave

Periodontia, gengiva, fenótipo, diagnóstico

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Gingival phenotype determination enables a better understanding of intra and interindividual clinical variations in healthy periodontal tissues.

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine gingival phenotype profiles and compare these in different regions of the oral cavity, considering clinical parameters related to the surrounding soft tissue in the upper and lower front teeth.

Material and method: Ninety-one periodontally-healthy patients were examined and clinical parameters such as probing depth (PD), keratinized tissue width (KW), gingival thickness at both maxillary central incisors (GT) and gingival phenotype (GP) were determined for the upper and lower front teeth. Data were statistically analyzed by paired and independent t-Student tests, Pearson Correlation and the Chi-square test, using a significance level of 5%.

Result: The thick gingival phenotype predominated in the upper anterior teeth (60.5%), while the thin phenotype was more prevalent in the lower anterior teeth (84.6%). Statistically significant differences were found for keratinized tissue and gingival thickness parameters, in relation to the upper and lower gingival phenotypes (p<0.05). There were no statistical significances for probing depth and gingival phenotype in the upper and lower teeth.

Conclusion: It was concluded that the thick phenotype is more frequent in the upper anterior teeth and that the thin phenotype is more common in the lower anterior teeth, and more frequent in males. The keratinized tissue and gingival thickness parameters proved to be suitable for the determination of gingival phenotype.
 

Keywords

Periodontics, gingiva, phenotype, diagnosis

References

Cortellini P, Bissada NF. Mucogingival conditions in the natural dentition: narrative review, case definitions, and diagnostic considerations. J Periodontol. 2018 Jun;89(Suppl 1):S204-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/JPER.16-0671. PMid:29926948.

Jepsen S, Caton JG, Albandar JM, Bissada NF, Bouchard P, Cortellini P, et al. Periodontal manifestations of systemic diseases and developmental and acquired conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 3 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Jun;45(Suppl 20):S219-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12951. PMid:29926500.

Fischer KR, Künzlberger A, Donos N, Fickl S, Friedmann A. Gingival biotype revisited-novel classification and assessment tool. Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Jan;22(1):443-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2131-1. PMid:28551728.

Kahn S, Almeida RA, Dias AT, Rodrigues WJ, Barceleiro MO, Taba M Jr. Clinical considerations on the root coverage of gingival recessions in thin or thick biotype. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2016 May-Jun;36(3):409-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/prd.2249. PMid:27100811.

Olsson M, Lindhe J. Periodontal characteristics in individuals with varying form of upper central incisors. J Clin Periodontol. 1991 Jan;18(1):78-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1991.tb01124.x. PMid:2045523.

Vandana KL, Savitha B. Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Jul;32(7):828-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00757.x. PMid:15966893.

Matarese G, Isola G, Ramaglia L, Dalessandri D, Lucchese A, Alibrandi A, et al. Periodontal biotype: characteristic, prevalence and dimensions related to dental malocclusion. Minerva Stomatol. 2016 Aug;65(4):231-8. PMid:27035270.

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 May;36(5):428-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01398.x. PMid:19419444.

Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, Roe P, Smith DH. Gingival biotype assessment in the esthetic zone: visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2010 Jun;30(3):237-43. PMid:20386780.

Anand V, Govila V, Gulati M. Correlation of gingival tissue biotypes with gender and tooth morphology: a randomized clinical study. Indian J Dent. 2012 Oct-Dec;3(4):190-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijd.2012.05.006.

Shetty S, Bhat V. Prevalence of different gingival biotypes in individuals with varying forms of maxillary central incisors: a survey. J Dent Implant. 2013;3(2):116-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-6781.118888.

Lang NP, Bartold PM. Periodontal health. J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Jun;45(Suppl 20):S9-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12936. PMid:29926485.

Cuny-Houchmand M, Renaudin S, Leroul M, Planche L, Guehennec LL, Soueidan A. Gingival biotype: the probe test utility. Open J Stomatol. 2013 Jan;3(2):123-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojst.2013.32023.

Manjunath RG, Rana A, Sarkar A. Gingival biotype assessment in a healthy periodontium: transgingival probing method. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 May;9(5):ZC66-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/13759.5956. PMid:26155566.

Grover V, Bhardwaj A, Mohindra K, Malhotra R. Analysis of the gingival biotype based on the measurement of the dentopapillary complex. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2014 Jan;18(1):43-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.128199. PMid:24744543.

Fischer KR, Richter T, Kebschull M, Petersen N, Fickl S. On the relationship between gingival biotypes and gingival thickness in young Caucasians. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Aug;26(8):865-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.12356. PMid:24580810.

Kolte R, Kolte A, Mahajan A. Assessment of gingival thickness with regards to age, gender and arch location. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2014 Jul;18(4):478-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.138699. PMid:25210263.

Gontiya G, Galgali SR. Evaluation of an innovative radiographic technique - parallel profile radiography - to determine the dimensions of dentogingival unit. Indian J Dent Res. 2011 Mar-Apr;22(2):237-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.84294. PMid:21891892.

Alves PHM, Alves TCLP, Pegoraro TA, Costa YM, Bonfante EA, Almeida ALPF. Measurement properties of gingival biotype evaluation methods. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018 Jun;20(3):280-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.12583. PMid:29350855.

Egreja AM, 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 Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2012 Oct;32(5):573-9. PMid:22754905.

Esfahrood ZR, Kadkhodazadeh M, Talebi Ardakani MR. Gingival biotype: a review. Gen Dent. 2013 Jul;61(4):14-7. PMid:23823337.

Kahn S, Menezes CC, Imperial RC, Leite JS, Dias AT. Influência do biótipo periodontal na implantodontia e na ortodontia. Rev Bras Odontol. 2013;70(1):40-5.

Abraham S, Deepak KT, Ambili R, Preeja C, Archana V. Gingival biotype and its clinical significance – a review. Saudi J Dent Res. 2014 Jan;5(1):3-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ksujds.2013.06.003.

Frost NA, Mealey BL, Jones AA, Huynh-Ba G. Periodontal biotype: gingival thickness as it relates to probe visibility and buccal plate thickness. J Periodontol. 2015 Oct;86(10):1141-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1902/jop.2015.140394. PMid:26110452.

Issrani R, Chavva S, Prabhu N, Keluskar V, Jirge V, Kumbujkar V, et al. Transgingival probing and ultrasonographic methods for determination of gingival thickness- a comparative study. Adv Hum Biol. 2013;3(3):43-51.
 

5d7fc9360e8825cb56bbec00 rou Articles
Links & Downloads

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Share this page
Page Sections