Cargando…

A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Background and Objective: Gingival biotype can be assessed using a variety of invasive and non-invasive procedures, such as direct probing, transgingival probing, ultrasound-guided approaches, and, for the more sophisticated, cone-beam computed tomography. The aim of this study was to evaluate gingi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Das, Gotam, Ahmed, Abdul Razzaq, Suleman, Ghazala, Lal, Abhishek, Rana, Muhammad Haseeb, Ahmed, Naseer, Arora, Suraj
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9504133/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36143989
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina58091312
_version_ 1784796139023761408
author Das, Gotam
Ahmed, Abdul Razzaq
Suleman, Ghazala
Lal, Abhishek
Rana, Muhammad Haseeb
Ahmed, Naseer
Arora, Suraj
author_facet Das, Gotam
Ahmed, Abdul Razzaq
Suleman, Ghazala
Lal, Abhishek
Rana, Muhammad Haseeb
Ahmed, Naseer
Arora, Suraj
author_sort Das, Gotam
collection PubMed
description Background and Objective: Gingival biotype can be assessed using a variety of invasive and non-invasive procedures, such as direct probing, transgingival probing, ultrasound-guided approaches, and, for the more sophisticated, cone-beam computed tomography. The aim of this study was to evaluate gingival biotype in relation to transgingival probing and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This study included a total of two hundred healthy individuals. Gingival thickness was assessed and measured from the right and left maxillary central incisor teeth using CBCT and transgingival probing of the attached gingiva. The measurements were analyzed with regard to tooth type (central incisor). Linear measurements for gingival biotype were measured using both methods. Correlations and differences between measurement methods were assessed. Results: The mean age of study participants was 32.49 ± 8.61 years. The radiographic measurements on CBCT were 1.34 ± 0.17 mm for the right central and 1.28 ± 0.21mm for the left central. The transgingival probing measurements were 1.31 ± 0.18 for the right central and 1.22 ± 0.21mm for the left central. Conclusion: As per the results of this study, there is a significant positive correlation between transgingival probing and CBCT measurements of gingival biotypes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9504133
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95041332022-09-24 A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Das, Gotam Ahmed, Abdul Razzaq Suleman, Ghazala Lal, Abhishek Rana, Muhammad Haseeb Ahmed, Naseer Arora, Suraj Medicina (Kaunas) Article Background and Objective: Gingival biotype can be assessed using a variety of invasive and non-invasive procedures, such as direct probing, transgingival probing, ultrasound-guided approaches, and, for the more sophisticated, cone-beam computed tomography. The aim of this study was to evaluate gingival biotype in relation to transgingival probing and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This study included a total of two hundred healthy individuals. Gingival thickness was assessed and measured from the right and left maxillary central incisor teeth using CBCT and transgingival probing of the attached gingiva. The measurements were analyzed with regard to tooth type (central incisor). Linear measurements for gingival biotype were measured using both methods. Correlations and differences between measurement methods were assessed. Results: The mean age of study participants was 32.49 ± 8.61 years. The radiographic measurements on CBCT were 1.34 ± 0.17 mm for the right central and 1.28 ± 0.21mm for the left central. The transgingival probing measurements were 1.31 ± 0.18 for the right central and 1.22 ± 0.21mm for the left central. Conclusion: As per the results of this study, there is a significant positive correlation between transgingival probing and CBCT measurements of gingival biotypes. MDPI 2022-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9504133/ /pubmed/36143989 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina58091312 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Das, Gotam
Ahmed, Abdul Razzaq
Suleman, Ghazala
Lal, Abhishek
Rana, Muhammad Haseeb
Ahmed, Naseer
Arora, Suraj
A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_full A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_fullStr A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_short A Comparative Evaluation of Dentogingival Tissue Using Transgingival Probing and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_sort comparative evaluation of dentogingival tissue using transgingival probing and cone-beam computed tomography
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9504133/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36143989
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina58091312
work_keys_str_mv AT dasgotam acomparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT ahmedabdulrazzaq acomparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT sulemanghazala acomparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT lalabhishek acomparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT ranamuhammadhaseeb acomparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT ahmednaseer acomparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT arorasuraj acomparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT dasgotam comparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT ahmedabdulrazzaq comparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT sulemanghazala comparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT lalabhishek comparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT ranamuhammadhaseeb comparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT ahmednaseer comparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT arorasuraj comparativeevaluationofdentogingivaltissueusingtransgingivalprobingandconebeamcomputedtomography