Esra AŞIK, Elif ŞENER, Bedriye Güniz BAKSI ŞEN, Sema ÇINAR BECERİK

Dişeti Fenotipinin Önemi ve Belirleme Yöntemleri

Dişeti fenotipi, dişetinin bukko-lingual yöndeki kalınlığını ve keratinize doku genişliğini tanımlamak için kullanılır. Dişeti morfolojisi altta yatan kemiği taklit eder. Dişeti fenotipi kişiden kişiye ve aynı kişide farklı diş bölgelerinde değişiklik gösterebilir. Dişeti fenotipinin cerrahi periodontal uygulamalarda tedavi sonucunu etkileyen önemli bir faktör olduğu bilinmektedir. Mukogingival,rejeneratif ve implant cerrahi işlemler öncesinde dişeti kalınlığı belirlenerek uygun cerrahi yöntemin seçilmesi operasyon başarısını önemli ölçüde etkilemektedir. Bu nedenle klinik uygulamada dişeti fenotipinin güvenilir yöntemler kullanılarak belirlenmesi önemlidir. Bu güne kadar dişeti kalınlığını belirlemek amacıyla girişimsel ve girişimsel olmayan çeşitli yöntemler kullanılmıştır. Bu derlemede dişeti fenotipinin genel özellikleri ile dişeti kalınlığı ölçüm yöntemleri ayrıntılı bir şekilde irdelenmektedir.

The Importance of Gingival Phenotype and Detection Methods

The gingival phenotype is used to define the thickness of the gingiva in the bucco-lingual direction and the keratinized tissue width. Gingival morphology mimics the underlying bone. The gingival phenotype may vary from person to person and in different tooth regions of the same person. It has been shown that gingival phenotype is an important factor affecting the outcome of treatment in surgical periodontal applications. Gingival thickness should be determined prior to mucogingival, regenerative and implant surgical applications in order to choose appropriate surgical method. Therefore, it is important in clinical practice to determine the gingival phenotype using reliable methods. To date, various invasive and non-invasive methods have been used to determine gingival thickness. In this review, general properties of gingival phenotype and gingival thickness measurement methods are explained in detail.

PDF

___

1. Jepsen S, Caton JG, et al. Periodontal manifestations of systemicdiseases 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;45(Suppl 20):S219–S229.
2.Ochsenbein C, Ross S. A reevaluation of osseous surgery. Dent Clin North Am. 1969 Jan;13(1):87- 102.
3. Müller HP, Eger T. Gingival phenotypes in young male adults. J Clin Periodontol 1997;24:65–71
4. Schröder HE. The periodontium. In:Oksche A, Vollrath L, editors. Handbook of microscopic anatomy. 5th ed. Berlin: Springer; 1986, pp. 233- 47.
5. Olsson M, Lindhe J, Marinello CP. On the relationship between crown form and clinical features of the gingiva in adolescents. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 1993;20:570–577.
6. Slak B, Daabous A, Bednarz W, et al. Assessment of gingival thickness using an ultrasonic dental system prototype: A comparison to traditional methods. Annals of Anatomy 2015;199: 98-103
7. Olsson M, Lindhe J. Periodontal characteristics in individuals with varying form of the upper central incisors. J Clin Periodontol 1991;18:78–82.
8. Cook DR, Mealey BL, Verrett RG, Mills MP, Noujeim ME, Lasho DJ, Cronin RJ Jr. Relationship between clinical periodontal biotype and labial plate thickness: an in vivo study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011 Jul- Aug;31(4):345-54.
9. Fischer KR, Grill E, Jockel-Schneider Y, Bechtold M, Schlagenhauf U, Fickl S. On the relationship between gingival biotypes and supracrestal gingival height, crown form and papilla height. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 Aug;25(8):894-8.
10. Becker W, Ochsenbein C, Tibbetts L, Becker BE. Alveolar bone anatomic profiles as measured from dry skulls. Clinical ramifications. J Clin Periodontol. 1997 Oct;24(10):727-31.
11. 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;36:428- 433.
12. 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;13:654-7
13. Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, Roe P, Smith DH. Gingival biotype assessment in the aesthetic zone: Visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2010;30:237- 43.
14. Pontoriero, R. & Carnevale, G. (2001) Surgical crown lengthening: a 12-month clinical wound healing study. Journal of Periodontology 72, 841– 848
15. Baldi C, Pini-Prato G, Pagliaro U, et al. Coronally advanced flap procedure for root coverage. Is flap thickness a relevant predictor to achieve root coverage? A 19-case series. J Periodontol 1999;70:1077-1084.
16. Hwang D, Wang HL. Flap thickness as a predictor of root coverage: A systematic review. J Periodontol 2006;77:1625-1634.
17. Anderegg CR, Metzler DG, Nicoli BK. Gingiva Thickness in Guided Tissue Regeneration and Associated Recession at Facial Furcation Defects. J Periodontol 1995;66: 397-402.
18. Wennstro¨m JL. Mucogingival considerations in orthodontic treatment. Semin Orthod 1996;2:46-54.
19. Linkevicius T, Apse P, Grybauskas S, & Puisys A. Influence of thin mucosal tissues on crestal bone stability around implants with platform switching: A 1-year pilot study. Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery 2010; 68(9): 2272–2277.
20. Hermann JS, Buser D, Schenk RK, Schoolfield JD, Cochran DL. Biologic width around one- and two piece titanium implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001; 12(6):559-571.
21. Cardaropoli G, Lekholm U, Wennstrom JL. Tissue alterations at implant- supported single-tooth replacements: a 1- year prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006; 17(2):165-171.
22. Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited. J Clin Periodontol . 1996; 23(10): 971-973.
23. Zigdon H, Machtei EE. The dimensions of keratinized mucosa around implants affect clinical and immunological parameters Clin. Oral Impl. Res 2008;19:387–392
24. Cairo F, Pagliaro U, & Nieri M. Soft tissue management at implant sites. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 2008; 35(8):163–167.
25. Ostlund SG. The effect of complete dentures on the gum tissues: a histological and histopathological investigation. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 1958;16:1-40
26. Mallikarjun S, Babu HM, Das S, Neelakanti A, Dawra C, Shinde SV. Comparative evaluation of soft and hard tissue dimensions in the anterior maxilla using radiovisiography and cone beam computed tomography: A pilot study. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2016;20:174-177.
27. Janu´ario AL, Barriviera M, and Duarte WR. Soft tissue cone-beam computed tomography: a novel method for the measurement of gingival tissue and the dimensions of the dentogingival unit. Journal of Esthetic and RestorativeDentistry 2008;20(6):366– 373.
28. Manjunath RGS, Rana A, Sarkar A. Gingival Biotype Assessment in a Healthy Periodontium: Transgingival Probing Method. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 2015 ;9:66-69
29. Vandana KL,Savitha B. Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location. J Clin Periodontol 2005;32:828-830
30. Goaslind GD, Robertson PB, Mahan CJ, Morrison WW, Olson Jv. Thickness of facial gingiva. J. Periodontol 1977;48:768-771.
31. Kothiwale S, Rathore A, Panjwani V. Enhancing gingival biotype through chorion membrane with innovative step in periodontal pocket therapy. Cell Tissue Bank 2016; 17:33–38.
32. Kydd WL, Daly CH, Wheeler JB. The thickness measurement of masticatory mucosa in vivo. Int Dent J. 1971;21(4):430-41.
33. Greenberg J, Laster L, Lıstgarten MA. Transgingival probing as a potential estimator of alveolar bone level. J. Periodontol. 1976; 47: 514- 517
34. Wara-aswapati N, Pitiphat W, Chandrapho N, Rattanayatikul C, Karimbux N. The thickness of palatal masticatory mucosa associated with age. J Periodontol. 2001;72:1407-12.
35. Borges GJ, Ruiz LFN, Alencar AHG, et.al. Cone- Beam Computed Tomography as a Diagnostic Method for Determination of Gingival Thickness and Distance between Gingival Margin and Bone Crest, The Scientific World Journal. 2015;1-10
36. 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; 86: 1141-1149
37. Balcı P, Pabuşçu Y. Temel Radyoloji Fiziği 2. Baskı, 2008 ,Meta Basım Matbaacılık, İzmir
38. Harorlı A. Ağız, Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi, 2014 ,Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri, İstanbul
39. Rumack CM, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW. Diagnostic Ultrasound. 2nd ed. St.Louis: Mosby- Year Book, 1999:357-371
40. Oyar O, Gülsoy UK. Tıbbi Görüntüleme Fiziği 2003: 197-230
41. Bushong SC. Radiologic Science for Technologists: Physic, Biology, and Protection. 5th ed. Mosby- Year Book; 1992:554-588.
42. Hangiandreou NJ. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents. Topics in US: B-mode US: basic concepts and new technology. Radiographics. 2003 Jul-Aug; 23(4): 1019-33.
43. Hedrick WR, Hykes, D.L., Starchman, D.E., “Ultrasound Physics and Intrumentation”, Mosby- YearBook, 1995, America, 2-19, 31-77.
44. Ghorayeb SR, Bertoncini CA, Hinders MK, “Ultrasonography in Dentistry”, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, 2008, 55(6): 1256-1266.
45. Baum G, Greenwood I, Slawski S, and Smirnow R. “Observation of internalstructures of teeth by ultrasonography,” Science, 1963;139(3554) :495– 496,.
46. Palou ME, Mc Quade MJ, Rossmann JA. The use of ultrasound for the determination of periodontal bone morphology. J.Periodontol 1987;58:262–265.
47. Irion KM, N¨ussle W, L¨ost C, and Faust U. Determination of the acoustical properties of enamel, dentin and alveolar bone, Ultraschall. Med., 1986;7(2): 87–93.
48. Demyun SM, and Hagenbuch KM. Ultrasonic method and apparatus for measuring the periodontal pocket, U. S. Patent 5100318, Periosonics, Inc., Shavertown, PA, Apr. 13, 1990.
49. Daly CH, Wheeler JB III. The use of ultrasonic thickness measurement in the clinical evaluation of the oral soft tissues. Int Dent J 1971;21:418-29.
50. Eger T, Müller HP, Heinecke A. Ultrasonic determination of gingival thickness: subject variation and influence of tooth type and clinical features. J Clin Periodontol 1996;23:839-45.
51. Müller HP, Schaller N, Eger T. Ultrasonic determination of thickness of masticatory mucosa A methodologic study Oral Surgery Oral Medıcıne Oral Pathology. 1999; 88:248-253
52. Tsiolis FI, Needleman IG, Griffiths GS, Periodontal Ultrasonography, J Clin Periodontol 2003;30: 849- 854
53. Alpiste-Illueca F. Dimensions of the dentogingival unit in maxillary anterior teeth: a new exploration technique (parallel profile radiograph). International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 2004; 24: 386–396.
54. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc. 2006;72:75-80.
55. Fu JH, Yeh CY, Chan HL, Tatarakis N, Leong DJ & Wang HL. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. Journal of Periodontology 2010;81:569–574.
56 Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, et al. Accurracy in measurement of distance using limited cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:228-231.
57. Januario, A. L., Barriviera, M., & Duarte, W. R. (2008). Soft tissue cone-beam computed tomography: A novel method for the measurement of gingival tissue and the dimensions of the dentogingival unit. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, 20(6), 366–373.
58. Amid R, Mirakhori M, Safi Y, Kadkhodazadeh M, Namdari M. Assessment of gingival biotype and facial hard/soft tissue dimensions in the maxillary anterior teeth region using cone beam computed tomography. Arch Oral Biol. 2017 Jul;79:1-6
59. Cao J, Hu WJ, Zhang H, et al. A novel technique for measurement of dentogingival tissue by cone beam computed tomography, Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2015; 119: 82-87.
60. Nikiforidou M, Tsalikis L, Angelopoulos C, Menexes G, Vouros I, Konstantinides A. Classification of periodontal biotypes with the use of CBCT. A cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Nov;20(8):2061-2071.
61. Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Umezu K & Kois JC. Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: an evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants in humans. Journal of Periodontology 2003;74: 557–562.
62. Rasperini G, Acunzo R, Cannalire P, Farronato G. Influence of PeriodontalBiotype on Root Surface Exposure During Orthodontic Treatment: A Preliminary Study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2015;35(5):665-675.