• P-ISSN 2277-3525 E-ISSN 2582-7901

Journal of Multidisciplinary
Dental Research

Article

Journal of Multidisciplinary Dental Research

DOI: 10.38138/JMDR/v8i2.22.49

Volume: 8, Issue: 2, Pages: 50-56

Original Article

Gingival Biotype Assessment in Association with Age, Gender and Dental Arch Location using a Novel Approach

T S Reshmi ​✉ 1 , Shashikanth Hegde 2 , K S Rajesh 3 , Vinita Boloor 4 , Anupama Rao 5

1 Post graduate student, Department of Periodontology, Yenepoya Dental College, Yenepoya (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
2 Professor and HOD, Department of Periodontology, Yenepoya Dental College, Yenepoya (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
3 Professor, Department of Periodontology, Yenepoya Dental College, Yenepoya (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
4 Addiitional Professor, Department of Periodontology, Yenepoya Dental College, Yenepoya (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
5 Reader, Department of Periodontology, Yenepoya Dental College, Yenepoya (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India

Corresponding author ​✉: [email protected]

Received Date:04 November 2022, Accepted Date:01 December 2022, Published Date:26 December 2022

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

To assess the gingival biotypes in a sample of periodontally healthy volunteers and to correlate their prevalence in accordance with age, gender and dental arch location using Hu-friedy Colorvue® Biotype probe. A total of ninety subjects with age groups of 16-34 years (22 males, 23 females) and 35-54 years (23 males, 22 females) were selected for this study. Gingival biotype was assessed in maxillary and mandibular anteriors and was differentiated into thin, medium, thick and very thick biotype using Colorvue® Biotype probe. Collected data was statistically analyzed using chi-square test. The association of age, gender and gingival biotype was not significant in relation to 31,32,33,41,42 and 43 but significant in relation to 11,12,13,21,22 and 23. Study showed that thick biotype decreased with advancing age. Medium and thicker gingival biotype were more prevalent in males. On dental arch comparison, the gingiva was found to be thicker in the maxillary arch as compared to mandibular arch. It was concluded that gingival thickness varies according to age, gender and dental arch. Colorvue® biotype probe was found to be an excellent tool for assessing gingival biotype in the most atraumatic and efficient way and thus aiding in selection of proper treatment protocol.

 

Key Messages: Since gingival biotype is gaining considerable attention as one of the key elements influencing aesthetic treatment outcome, assessment of gingival biotype is of paramount relevance. The Hu-friedy Colorvue® Biotype probe proves to be an excellent tool for assessing gingival biotype in the most atraumatic and efficient way.

 

Keywords: Gingival biotype, Colorvue biotype probe, Dental arch location

References

  1. Muller HPP, Eger T. Gingival phenotypes in young male adults. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. 1997;24(1):65–71. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.1997.tb01186.x
  2. Rouck TD, Eghbali R, Collys K, Bruyn HD, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype revisited: transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. 2009;36(5):428–433. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2009.01398.x
  3. Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, Roe P, Smith DH. Gingival biotype assessment is esthetic zone: Visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2010;30:237–243. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20386780/#:~:text=Prior%20to%20extraction%2C%20the%20gingival,using%20a%20tension%2Dfree%20caliper.
  4. Alves PHM, Alves TCLP, Pegoraro TA, Costa YM, Bonfante EA, Almeida ALPFD. Measurement properties of gingival biotype evaluation methods. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 2018;20(3):280–284. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12583
  5. Abraham S, Deepak KT, Ambili R, Preeja C, Archana V. Gingival biotype and its clinical significance – A review. The Saudi Journal for Dental Research. 2014;5(1):3–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ksujds.2013.06.003
  6. Memon S, Patel JR, Sethuraman R, Patel RR, Arora H. A comparative evaluation of the reliability of three methods of assessing gingival biotype in dentate subjects in different age groups: An in vivo study. The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. 2015;15(4):313–317. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103%2F0972-4052.171830
  7. Vandana KL, Savitha B. Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. 2005;32(7):828–830. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00757.x
  8. Eghbali A, Rouck TD, Bruyn HD, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype assessed by experienced and inexperienced clinicians. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. 2009;36(11):958–963. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2009.01479.x
  9. Reddy RT, Vandana KV, Prakash S. Gingival biotype--a review. Indian Journal of Dental Advancements. 2017;9(2):86–92.
  10. Mallikarjuna DM, Shetty MS, Fernandes AK, Mallikarjuna RM, Iyer K. Gingival biotype and its importance in restorative dentistry: A pilot study. Journal of Interdisciplinary Dentistry. 2016;6(3):116–120. Available from: https://www.jidonline.com/text.asp?2016/6/3/116/201651
  13. Kolte R, Kolte A, Mahajan A. Assessment of gingival thickness with regards to age, gender and arch location. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2014;18(4):478–481. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-124x.138699
  14. Agarwal V, Sunny, Mehrotra N, Vijay V. Gingival biotype assessment: Variations in gingival thickness with regard to age, gender, and arch location. Indian Journal of Dental Sciences. 2017;9(1):12–15. Available from: http://www.ijds.in/text.asp?2017/9/1/12/201639
  15. Wara-aswapati N, Pitiphat W, Chandrapho N, Rattanayatikul C, Karimbux K. The thickness of palatal masticatory mucosa associated with age. J Periodontol. 2001;72(10):1407–1412. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1407
  16. Chang LC. The association between embrasure morphology and central papilla recession. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. 2007;34(5):432–436. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2007.01072.x
  17. Joshi A, Suragimath G, Zope SA, Ashwinirani SR, Varma SA. Comparison of Gingival Biotype between different Genders based on Measurement of Dentopapillary Complex. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(9):40–45. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7860%2FJCDR%2F2017%2F30144.10575
  18. Manjunath RS, Rana A, Sarkar A. Gingival biotype assessment in a healthy periodontium: transgingival probing method. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9(5):66–69. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2015/13759.5956
  19. Shah R, Sowmya NK, Mehta DS. Prevalence of gingival biotype and its relationship to clinical parameters. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 2015;6(6):167–171. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-237x.166824

COPYRIGHT

© 2022 Published by International Dental Educationists’ Association (IDEA). This is an open-access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

  • 27 December 2022
  • VIEWS 733
  • PDF 139
Article Metrics


More articles

DON'T MISS OUT!

Subscribe now for latest articles, news.