Assessment of gingival thickness using an ultrasonic dental system prototype: A comparison to traditional methods

Ślak, Bartosz; Daabous, Andrew; Bednarz, Wojciech; Strumban, Emil; Maev, Roman Gr.

doi:10.1016/j.aanat.2014.02.010

Cited by 44 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These devices are designed for applications other than dentistry, therefore the higher SD values in these studies may be explained by the large probe prohibiting accurate positioning and by the low frequency which has lower sensitivity in thin tissue. The significance of the high frequency of the probe has been demonstrated recently on the prototype of an ultrasonic device designed for GT measurement with 50 MHz frequency, and the authors managed to reach an extremely low SD of repetitions in vitro …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Reproducibility of the PIROP ultrasonic biometer for gingival thickness measurements

Gánti

Bednarz

Kőműves

et al. 2018

J Esthet Restor Dent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Gingival thickness (GT) has a great importance in periodontal flap design, gingival recession, and soft tissue esthetic. The aim of this study was to determine the reproducibility of PIROP ultrasonic biometer, which is specially designed for human GT measurements and to compare with the invasive transgingival probing technique. Materials and Methods GT was measured in 25 periodontally healthy volunteers both by PIROP and an endodontic spreader on the attached gingiva. Reproducibility was assessed by calculating standrad deviaton (SD) in five repeated measurements and Pearson correlation coefficient (r). Agreement between the two methods was evaluated based on Bland‐Altman limits of agreement (LoA). Results No systemic bias in GT was observed between the two methods. The repeatability of the PIROP was better than the spreader method (SD = 0.14 mm vs 0.20 mm, P < 0.001). With five repetitions, the measurement error of the PIROP was halved. The correlation among the repeated observations were strong (r = 0.86) for the ultrasonic, weak (r = 0.34) for the invasive method. The LoA between the two methods was −0.58 to +0.75 mm. Conclusion PIROP is a reliable device for GT measurements, but it is recommended to repeat the measurement a few times to improve the precision in individual case. Clinical Significance PIROP ultrasonic biometer could be used in routine practice to reliably measure the GT in noninvasive way. After short learning curve the measurement can be done quickly and conveniently.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Reproducibility of the PIROP ultrasonic biometer for gingival thickness measurements

Gánti

Bednarz

Kőműves

et al. 2018

J Esthet Restor Dent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been observed that visual assessment, which is a simple method, is not reliable as clinical experience is an important issue and thin biotype cannot always be identified correctly (12,17). Furthermore, small changes cannot be detected correctly by the measurements performed by ultrasonographic devices, which yield more reliable and repeatable assessments (18,19). It is observed that cone beam computed tomography provides the closest results to reality, but is not preferred owing to the potential side effects of radiation in routine clinical practice (20).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Gingival Biotype and Keratinized Gingival Width of Maxillary Anterior Region in Individuals with Different Types of Malocclusion

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of the present study is to evaluate the relationship of gingival thickness and width of keratinized gingiva with different malocclusion groups and amount of crowding. Methods:A total of 181 periodontally healthy subjects were enrolled in the present study. The study participants were divided into three malocclusion groups: Angle Class I, Angle Class II, and Angle Class III. Each group was divided into subgroups according to the amount of dental crowding, namely mild, moderate, and severe. The width of keratinized gingiva was calculated as the distance between mucogingival junction and free gingival margin, whereas gingival thickness was determined by a transgingival probing technique.Results: Tooth numbers 13 and 23 were observed to have thin gingival biotype. The width of keratinized gingiva for tooth numbers 13 and 23 was narrower in the severe crowding group than in the moderate and mild crowding groups. The relationship of gingival thickness and width of keratinized gingiva with Angle classification was not found to be significant. Conclusion:Although it is thought that there is a relationship between gingival thickness, width of keratinized gingiva, and Angle classification with regard to malaligned teeth, this cross-sectional evaluation of 181 patients failed to show a significant relationship.

show abstract

“…Recently, a non-invasive method for the measurement of gingival thickness prior to orthodontic treatment using an ultrasound technology was described, which should enable qualitative statements about the parodontal biotype and the risk of developing gingival recession linked to it (Slak et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of morphological parameters on the development of gingival recession in class III malocclusion

Warmuz¹,

Jagielak²,

Botzenhart

et al. 2016

Annals of Anatomy - Anatomischer Anzeiger

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessment of gingival thickness using an ultrasonic dental system prototype: A comparison to traditional methods

Cited by 44 publications

References 24 publications

Reproducibility of the PIROP ultrasonic biometer for gingival thickness measurements

Reproducibility of the PIROP ultrasonic biometer for gingival thickness measurements

Assessment of Gingival Biotype and Keratinized Gingival Width of Maxillary Anterior Region in Individuals with Different Types of Malocclusion

Influence of morphological parameters on the development of gingival recession in class III malocclusion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About