Comparison of different methods involved in the planning of clinical crown lengthening surgery

Zanatta, Fabrício Batistin; Giacomelli, Bruno; Dotto, Patrícia Pasquali; Fontanella, Vania Regina Camargo; Rösing, Cassiano Kuchenbecker

doi:10.1590/s1806-83242010000400012

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(17) is supposed to be the difference between CBCT and CAL. Although the biological width may involve variations among subjects, the variations are small (21,22).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone-beam computed tomography performance in measuring periodontal bone loss

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aimed to evaluate the performance of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in assessing periodontal bone loss. If effective, CBCT could potentially be a more comfortable and accurate way to evaluate this disease. One hundred and eighty tooth sites from 13 patients were included. Clinical attachment level (CAL) was measured, then CBCT images were acquired prior to periodontal surgery. Three periodontists measured the distance between the cemento-enamel junction and alveolar bone crest at the mesio-buccal, mid-buccal, distobuccal, mesio-lingual/palatal, mid-lingual/palatal, and disto-lingual/palatal sites. Comparisons of measurements were made among three methods. Interobserver and intra-observer variances were also analyzed. Statistically significant differences were found between CBCT and CAL + 2.04 mm (P = 0.000), as well as intra-surgical evaluation (P = 0.001). All sites showed differences in CBCT versus intra-surgical measurement and versus CAL + 2.04 comparisons, except the buccal sites (P = 0.187 and 0.147, respectively). This study indicates that the results of CBCT do not agree with results of intra-surgical measurement. As a result, CBCT should be used with caution and only when necessary, to avoid radiation hazards.

show abstract

“…(17) is supposed to be the difference between CBCT and CAL. Although the biological width may involve variations among subjects, the variations are small (21,22).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone-beam computed tomography performance in measuring periodontal bone loss

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a study comparing 3 different methods used for planning of CLP, transgingival probing was the most accurate measurement when compared to periapical and bite-wing radiographs. 30 Crown-to-root ratio…”

Section: Distance From Cej or Restoration Margin To The Crestal Bonementioning

confidence: 99%

Crown lengthening procedures: A literature review

Majzoub

Romanos

Cordioli³

2014

Seminars in Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In patients with a thin phenotype, the distance between the cemento-enamel junction and the bone edge should be 2.5 mm, whereas in patients with a thick gingival phenotype, it should be 3.5 mm. Moreover, if the gingiva is 1 mm thick, osteoplasty should be performed within 3 mm [6,[9][10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soft Tissue Retraction Maneuver in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Prior to Crown-Lengthening Procedure—A Technical Note

Adamska,

Stasiak,

Dąbrowski

et al. 2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: An accurate determination of the biological width and the relationship of the cemento-enamel junction with the border of the alveolar bone is crucial during a clinical crown-lengthening (CCL) procedure. The aim of this study was to present a technical note about the retraction techniques in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) prior to CCL, highlighting the significant enhancement in procedural accuracy and predictability that these techniques offer. Methods: Clinical and radiological examinations should be performed before a CCL procedure. It is necessary to determine the length of the tooth crowns, the periodontal pockets’ depth, and the phenotype of the gingiva. The ideal CBCT examination should be performed with soft tissue retraction. This can be achieved using retractors or cotton rolls. Results: Retraction of the lips, cheeks, and tongue allows one to assess the marginal gingiva, the cemento-enamel junction, and the alveolar bone. A detailed plan of the CCL procedure, which involves retraction, ensures both the aesthetic appeal and the achievement of a newly defined gingival zenith, enhancing the overall visual harmony. Conclusions: Compared with conventional radiographic imaging, the soft tissue retraction maneuver in CBCT prior to CCL surgery offers an effective approach to the evaluation and diagnosis of soft and hard tissue. This is because of the detailed planning of the aesthetic CCL procedure. Such an approach leads to superior aesthetic outcomes in dentistry, contributing to the advancement of aesthetic dentistry through a harmonious blend of art and science.

show abstract

Comparison of different methods involved in the planning of clinical crown lengthening surgery

Cited by 12 publications

References 9 publications

Cone-beam computed tomography performance in measuring periodontal bone loss

Cone-beam computed tomography performance in measuring periodontal bone loss

Crown lengthening procedures: A literature review

Soft Tissue Retraction Maneuver in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Prior to Crown-Lengthening Procedure—A Technical Note

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About