Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Matosinhos, Fernando Rodrigo Policarpo
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Nigro, Frederico, Barbosa, Bruno Aiello, Franco, Amanda Gonçalves, Francischone, Carlos Eduardo, Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Research, Society and Development
Texto Completo: https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/28472
Resumo: Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate vestibular gingival thickness in unitary implants located in the anterior maxilla through a cone beam tomography. Material and methods: After visual classification of the gingival biotype of the 32 patients selected for this study (16 patients with thin biotype and 16 patients with thick biotype) measurements of the vestibular tissue thickness were made at 2, 4 and 6 mm from the gingival margin in the apical direction in the most longitudinal transverse cut of the implant and the contralateral tooth through tomographic cone beam examination for soft tissue. The data of age and gender of the patients, mean buccal wall thickness of the implants and contralateral natural teeth, and the use of connective tissue graft (CTG) were tabulated for descriptive analysis. Results: For thin gingival biotype, mean vestibular gingival thickness varied between 1.26 ± 0.31 mm (teeth) and 2.65 ± 0.93 mm (implant), and for thick biotype varied from 1.77 ± 0.58 mm (teeth) and 3.01 ± 0.96 mm (implant). The use of CTG increased the buccal thickness of thick biotype when compared to thin biotype without CTG. Conclusions: It was not possible to establish a direct relationship between the classification of the gingival biotype of the contralateral teeth and the gingival biotype of the implants installed in the anterior region of the maxilla, but CTG was shown to be efficient in increasing gingival tissue thickness.
id UNIFEI_29cb4405f2a0696629335e2ff6b18c60
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/28472
network_acronym_str UNIFEI
network_name_str Research, Society and Development
repository_id_str
spelling Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotypeAnálisis del espesor gingival vestibular en implantes en el maxilar anterior y su relación con el biotipo gingivalAnálise da espessura gengival vestibular em implantes na maxila anterior e sua relação com o biotipo gengival Implante dentalFenotipo gingivalEncía.Dental ImplantGingival PhenotypeGum.Implante dentárioFenótipo gengivalGengiva.Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate vestibular gingival thickness in unitary implants located in the anterior maxilla through a cone beam tomography. Material and methods: After visual classification of the gingival biotype of the 32 patients selected for this study (16 patients with thin biotype and 16 patients with thick biotype) measurements of the vestibular tissue thickness were made at 2, 4 and 6 mm from the gingival margin in the apical direction in the most longitudinal transverse cut of the implant and the contralateral tooth through tomographic cone beam examination for soft tissue. The data of age and gender of the patients, mean buccal wall thickness of the implants and contralateral natural teeth, and the use of connective tissue graft (CTG) were tabulated for descriptive analysis. Results: For thin gingival biotype, mean vestibular gingival thickness varied between 1.26 ± 0.31 mm (teeth) and 2.65 ± 0.93 mm (implant), and for thick biotype varied from 1.77 ± 0.58 mm (teeth) and 3.01 ± 0.96 mm (implant). The use of CTG increased the buccal thickness of thick biotype when compared to thin biotype without CTG. Conclusions: It was not possible to establish a direct relationship between the classification of the gingival biotype of the contralateral teeth and the gingival biotype of the implants installed in the anterior region of the maxilla, but CTG was shown to be efficient in increasing gingival tissue thickness.La identificación del biotipo gingival es importante y debe ser tenida en cuenta durante el plan de tratamiento, de manera que se puedan predecir estrategias de manipulación tisular para mejorar los resultados estéticos. Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar el espesor gingival vestibular en implantes unitarios ubicados en la maxilar anterior, mediante examen tomográfico de haz cónico para tejidos blandos. Después de la clasificación visual del biotipo gingival de los 32 pacientes seleccionados para este estudio (16 pacientes con biotipo delgado y 16 pacientes con biotipo grueso), se realizaron mediciones del espesor del tejido bucal a 2, 4 y 6 mm del margen gingival. en dirección apical en el corte transversal longitudinal del implante y el diente contralateral, mediante examen tomográfico de haz cónico para tejidos blandos. Los resultados mostraron medidas promedio de espesor gingival bucal a los dientes de 1,26 ± 0,31 mm en pacientes con biotipo gingival delgado y 1,77 ± 0,58 mm en pacientes con biotipo gingival grueso; y medidas promedio de 2,65 ± 0,93 mm y 3,01 ± 0,96 mm de espesor gingival en vestibular de los implantes analizados, para el biotipo delgado y biotipo grueso, respectivamente. Además, se destacó la importancia de utilizar un injerto de tejido conectivo, el cual, al ser utilizado, los pacientes presentaban un espesor de tejido vestibular promedio de 2,85 ± 0,93 mm y de 3,19 ± 1,08 mm para biotipo delgado y grueso. No fue posible establecer una relación directa entre la clasificación del biotipo gingival de los dientes contralaterales y el biotipo gingival de los implantes instalados en la región anterior del maxilar.A identificação do biotipo gengival é importante e deve ser levada em consideração durante o plano de tratamento, para que estratégias de manipulação tecidual possam ser previstas, a fim de melhorar os resultados estéticos.Este estudo objetivou avaliar a espessura gengival vestibular em implantes unitários localizados na maxila anterior, através de exame tomográfico cone beam para tecido mole. Após classificação visual do biotipo gengival dos 32 pacientes selecionados para este estudo (sendo 16 pacientes de biotipo fino e 16 pacientes de biotipo espesso), foram feitas medidas da espessura tecidualvestibular a2, 4 e 6 mm a partir da margem gengival em direção apical no corte transversal mais longitudinal do implante e do dente contralateral, através de exame tomográfico cone beam para tecido mole. Os resultados apresentaram medidas médias de espessura gengival vestibular aos dentes de 1,26 ± 0,31mm em pacientes de biotipo gengival fino e de 1,77 ± 0,58mm em pacientes de biotipo gengival espesso; e medidas médias 2,65 ± 0,93mm e de 3,01 ± 0,96mm de espessura gengival na vestibular dos implantes analisados, para o biotipo fino e biotipo espesso, respectivamente. Além disso, evidenciou-se a importância da utilização do enxerto de tecido conjuntivo, que quando utilizado, os pacientes apresentaram uma média de espessura tecidual vestibular de 2,85 ± 0,93 mm e de 3,19 ± 1,08 mm para biotipo fino e espesso. Não foi possível estabelecer uma relação direta entre a classificação do biotipo gengival dos dentes contralaterais com o biotipo gengival dos implantes instalados na região anterior da maxila.Research, Society and Development2022-04-18info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/2847210.33448/rsd-v11i5.28472Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 No. 5; e46411528472Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 Núm. 5; e46411528472Research, Society and Development; v. 11 n. 5; e464115284722525-3409reponame:Research, Society and Developmentinstname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)instacron:UNIFEIenghttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/28472/25604Copyright (c) 2022 Fernando Rodrigo Policarpo Matosinhos; Frederico Nigro; Bruno Aiello Barbosa; Amanda Gonçalves Franco; Bruno Salles Sotto-Maior; Carlos Eduardo Francischonehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMatosinhos, Fernando Rodrigo Policarpo Nigro, Frederico Barbosa, Bruno Aiello Franco, Amanda Gonçalves Francischone, Carlos Eduardo Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles2022-04-17T18:18:56Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/28472Revistahttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/indexPUBhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/oairsd.articles@gmail.com2525-34092525-3409opendoar:2024-01-17T09:45:51.694755Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
Análisis del espesor gingival vestibular en implantes en el maxilar anterior y su relación con el biotipo gingival
Análise da espessura gengival vestibular em implantes na maxila anterior e sua relação com o biotipo gengival
title Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
spellingShingle Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
Matosinhos, Fernando Rodrigo Policarpo
Implante dental
Fenotipo gingival
Encía.
Dental Implant
Gingival Phenotype
Gum.
Implante dentário
Fenótipo gengival
Gengiva.
title_short Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
title_full Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
title_fullStr Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
title_sort Analysis of buccal gingival thickness in maxillary implants and its relation to gingival biotype
author Matosinhos, Fernando Rodrigo Policarpo
author_facet Matosinhos, Fernando Rodrigo Policarpo
Nigro, Frederico
Barbosa, Bruno Aiello
Franco, Amanda Gonçalves
Francischone, Carlos Eduardo
Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles
author_role author
author2 Nigro, Frederico
Barbosa, Bruno Aiello
Franco, Amanda Gonçalves
Francischone, Carlos Eduardo
Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Matosinhos, Fernando Rodrigo Policarpo
Nigro, Frederico
Barbosa, Bruno Aiello
Franco, Amanda Gonçalves
Francischone, Carlos Eduardo
Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Implante dental
Fenotipo gingival
Encía.
Dental Implant
Gingival Phenotype
Gum.
Implante dentário
Fenótipo gengival
Gengiva.
topic Implante dental
Fenotipo gingival
Encía.
Dental Implant
Gingival Phenotype
Gum.
Implante dentário
Fenótipo gengival
Gengiva.
description Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate vestibular gingival thickness in unitary implants located in the anterior maxilla through a cone beam tomography. Material and methods: After visual classification of the gingival biotype of the 32 patients selected for this study (16 patients with thin biotype and 16 patients with thick biotype) measurements of the vestibular tissue thickness were made at 2, 4 and 6 mm from the gingival margin in the apical direction in the most longitudinal transverse cut of the implant and the contralateral tooth through tomographic cone beam examination for soft tissue. The data of age and gender of the patients, mean buccal wall thickness of the implants and contralateral natural teeth, and the use of connective tissue graft (CTG) were tabulated for descriptive analysis. Results: For thin gingival biotype, mean vestibular gingival thickness varied between 1.26 ± 0.31 mm (teeth) and 2.65 ± 0.93 mm (implant), and for thick biotype varied from 1.77 ± 0.58 mm (teeth) and 3.01 ± 0.96 mm (implant). The use of CTG increased the buccal thickness of thick biotype when compared to thin biotype without CTG. Conclusions: It was not possible to establish a direct relationship between the classification of the gingival biotype of the contralateral teeth and the gingival biotype of the implants installed in the anterior region of the maxilla, but CTG was shown to be efficient in increasing gingival tissue thickness.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-04-18
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/28472
10.33448/rsd-v11i5.28472
url https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/28472
identifier_str_mv 10.33448/rsd-v11i5.28472
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/28472/25604
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 No. 5; e46411528472
Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 Núm. 5; e46411528472
Research, Society and Development; v. 11 n. 5; e46411528472
2525-3409
reponame:Research, Society and Development
instname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)
instacron:UNIFEI
instname_str Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)
instacron_str UNIFEI
institution UNIFEI
reponame_str Research, Society and Development
collection Research, Society and Development
repository.name.fl_str_mv Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv rsd.articles@gmail.com
_version_ 1797052765067804672