Palatal Soft Tissue Thickness on Maxillary Posterior Teeth and Its Relation to Palatal Vault Angle Measured by Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Hormdee, Daranee; Yamsuk, Thanwarat; Sutthiprapaporn, Pipop

doi:10.1155/2020/8844236

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To our knowledge, only two studies have been published on the reliability of radiographic techniques for determining palatal mucosal thickness and palatal vaults [20][21][22][23]. When doing soft tissue grafting in periodontal plastic surgery, the palatal masticatory mucosa serves as the primary donor location for connective tissue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A power analysis was designed to have adequate power to apply a statistical test of the null hypothesis that there is no difference between tested groups. By adopting an alpha ( α ) level of (0.05), a beta ( β ) of (0.2) (i.e., power = 80%), and effect size ( f ) of (0.637) calculated based on the results of a previous study [ 20 ], the minimum required sample size ( n ) was found to be (27) cases. Sample size calculation was performed using G ∗ Power version 3.1.9.7.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Determination of Palatal Soft Tissue Thickness and Safe Zone for Palatal Soft Tissue Harvest Using CBCT: A Retrospective Study

Aldhanhani

Kukreja

Reddy

et al. 2023

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim. Our decision to conduct this study was motivated by the dearth of knowledge on geographical variations in the thickness of the palatal masticatory mucosa. The aim of the present study is to comprehensively analyze the palatal mucosal thickness and indicate the safety zone for palatal soft tissue harvesting using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Material and Methods. As this was a retrospective analysis of cases previously reported to the hospital, written consent was not acquired. The analysis was carried out on 30 CBCT images. Two examiners evaluated the images separately to avoid bias. Measurements were done from the midportion of the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the midpalatal suture in a horizontal line. Measurements were recorded from the maxillary canine, first premolar, second premolar, first molar, and second molar and were marked in axial and coronal sections at distances of 3, 6, and 9 mm from the CEJ. The relationship between palate soft tissue thickness in relation to each tooth, palatal vault angle, teeth, and the greater palatine grove was evaluated. Differences in the palatal mucosal thickness according to age, gender, and tooth site were evaluated. Categorical data were presented as frequencies and percentages. Numerical data are presented as mean and standard deviation values. They are explored for normality using Shapiro–Wilk’s test. Data are normally distributed and are analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc test for independent variables and paired t-test for repeated measures. The significance level is set at p ≤ 0.05 for all tests. Statistical analysis is performed with R statistical analysis software version 4.1.3 for Windows. Results. For sex and nationality, there was no significant association ( p > 0.05 ), while for age, cases 35 years and older had significantly higher mucosal thickness than cases younger than 35 years old ( p < 0.001 ). For all teeth, the association was statistically significant ( p < 0.001 ). For the canine and first premolar, cases with deep angles had significantly higher mean values than those with moderate angles ( p < 0.001 ). For other teeth, cases with deep angles had significantly higher mean values than other angles ( p < 0.001 ). Conclusion. Palatal mucosal thickness varied significantly from the canine to the second molar; the most appropriate site for graft harvesting is the canine to second premolar area which is 9–12 mm from the midpalatal suture aspect and is considered a safe zone for harvesting palatal graft.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of Palatal Soft Tissue Thickness and Safe Zone for Palatal Soft Tissue Harvest Using CBCT: A Retrospective Study

Aldhanhani

Kukreja

Reddy

et al. 2023

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The palatal vault angle is the angle between the horizontal plane passing through the enamel-cementum junction of the maxillary first molar and the line drawn through the midpalatal suture. According to the palatal vault angle, 3 groups are determined for the palatal structure: the shallow group where the angle is less than 30 degrees, the intermediate group between 30 and 40 degrees and the deep group where the angle is greater than 40 degrees 7 .…”

Section: Radiological Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of the relatıonshıp of palatal arch morphometry with maxillary sinus volume: CBCT study

Tassoker,

Öztürk,

Aydin

2024

Balkan J Dent Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aim: The maxillofacial region is a complex of anatomical structures that are in close proximity and connection with each other. The aim of this study was to determine the shape, depth, width, length and palatal vault angle of the palatal arch on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images taken for various reasons and to determine the relationship between these factors and maxillary sinus volume. Material and Methods: CBCT images of a total of 150 male and female patients over the age of 18, taken for different diagnostic purposes, were evaluated by an oral radiologist with two years of experience. The shape of the palatal arch was determined on each image, and palatal depth, width, length and palatal vault angle were measured. ITK-SNAP (version 3.8.0) software was used for maxillary sinus measurement. Statistical analysis of the study was performed using SPSS v.21 software. Results: All of the measured parameters were found to be statistically significant between genders, except for the palatal vault angle. As a result of the correlation analysis, it was shown that palatal length was 0.4% (R2=0.004), palatal depth was 42.3% (R2=0.423), and palatal width was 2%(R2=0.020) effective in explaining the palatal vault angle. A high level of correlation was detected between the right (1) and left (2) sinus maxillaris volumes and total sinus maxillaris volumes (r1=0.959, r2=0.961). Conclusions: There is a significant difference in palatal arch parameters between different genders. In addition, these dimensions also play a role on maxillary sinus volumes.

show abstract

“…When considering the stability of palatal orthodontic miniscrew, the mucosal thickness should be considered in addition to the bone thickness [12]. The palatal mucosa is denser and thicker than the buccal mucosa, and its thickness varies with the placement height.…”

Section: Factors Affecting Insertionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone Beam Computed Tomography References for Placement Site and Insertion Angle of a Palatal Orthodontic Miniscrew in the Posterior Maxillary Area

Liu

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To strengthen the safety and stability of palatal orthodontic miniscrew, the interradicular width, and the thickness of palatal mucosal and bone should be considered, providing a reference for placement site and insertion angle of palatal orthodontic miniscrew. Methods: The imaging data of 90 adult patients were selected for this study, and the jaw bone was reconstructed by scanning. On the maxillary palatal aspect, distances of 12, 14, 16 and 18 mm from the palatal apex of the first maxillary molar between the maxillary second premolar and first molar, and between the maxillary first and second molars were selected as measurement points. Linear measurements included the interradicular width of the palatal root between adjacent teeth, as well as the palatal mucosal thickness and bone thickness if the miniscrew was inserted at 30°, 45°, 60° and 90° relative to the long axis of the tooth. Data comparisons were performed via one-way analyses of variance and least significant difference tests.Results: The greater the insertion angle, the shorter the interradicular width and mucosal thickness, the difference among all these angles was statistically significant (P < 0.05)；an angle between 60–90° was safer for insertion. The higher the placement site, the greater the interradicular width and mucosal thickness, the difference among all placement sites was statistically significant (P < 0.05); placement sites between 14–16mm had greater interradicular widths.Conclusions: It is safer to insert a palatal orthodontic miniscrew at a 60–90° angle 14–16 mm away from the palatal apex of the first maxillary molar between the maxillary second premolar and first molar. Further, we found it is safer to insert a palatal orthodontic miniscrew at a 60° angle 14–16 mm away from the palatal apex of the first maxillary molar between the maxillary first and second molars.

show abstract

Palatal Soft Tissue Thickness on Maxillary Posterior Teeth and Its Relation to Palatal Vault Angle Measured by Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Cited by 7 publications

References 17 publications

Determination of Palatal Soft Tissue Thickness and Safe Zone for Palatal Soft Tissue Harvest Using CBCT: A Retrospective Study

Determination of Palatal Soft Tissue Thickness and Safe Zone for Palatal Soft Tissue Harvest Using CBCT: A Retrospective Study

Investigation of the relatıonshıp of palatal arch morphometry with maxillary sinus volume: CBCT study

Cone Beam Computed Tomography References for Placement Site and Insertion Angle of a Palatal Orthodontic Miniscrew in the Posterior Maxillary Area

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About