New method of assessing the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness by means of a noninvasive and relatively accurate digital registration method. METHODS: In 20 periodontally healthy subjects, cone-beam computed tomographic images and intraoral scanned files were obtained. Measurements of buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness at the central incisors, lateral incisors, and canines were performed at points 0–5 mm from the alveolar crest on the superimposed images. The Friedman test was used to compare buccal bone and gingival thickness for each depth between the 3 tooth types. Spearman's correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the correlation between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness. RESULTS: Of the central incisors, 77% of all sites had a buccal thickness of 0.5–1.0 mm, and 23% had a thickness of 1.0–1.5 mm. Of the lateral incisors, 71% of sites demonstrated a buccal bone thickness <1.0 mm, as did 63% of the canine sites. For gingival thickness, the proportion of sites <1.0 mm was 88%, 82%, and 91% for the central incisors, lateral incisors, and canines, respectively. Significant differences were observed in gingival thickness at the alveolar crest level (G0) between the central incisors and canines (P=0.032) and between the central incisors and lateral incisors (P=0.013). At 1 mm inferior to the alveolar crest, a difference was found between the central incisors and canines (P=0.025). The lateral incisors and canines showed a significant difference for buccal bone thickness 5 mm under the alveolar crest (P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: The gingiva and buccal bone of the anterior maxillary teeth were found to be relatively thin (<1 mm) overall. A tendency was found for gingival thickness to increase and bone thickness to decrease toward the root apex. Differences were found between teeth at some positions, although the correlation between buccal bone thickness and soft tissue thickness was generally not significant.