Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Gingival phenotype (GP) is regarded as a valuable indicator for forecasting the probability of attaining favourable aesthetic and functional results with orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to investigate the accuracy and reproducibility of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for assessing gingival thickness (GT) in both arches compared to the transgingival probing method. The secondary objective was to determine the optimal cut-off values for GT using CBCT.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted where GP was determined based on the probe transparency method (TRAN). The GT measurements were obtained by both methods at 2mm from the free gingival margin (FGM) for all teeth anterior to the first molar. The data was statistically analysed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plots, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The statistical significance level was set at a P-value<0.05.
RESULTS: The study included 60 subjects (1200 teeth). The mean GT in both the maxillary (1.14±0.17mm) and mandibular (0.94±0.15mm) arches was significantly greater (P<0.05) for the transgingival probing method than for the CBCT method. As shown in the Bland-Altman plot, the bias between the two methods was greater in the maxillary jaw (0.060; 95% CI: 0.044 to 0.076) and in individuals with a thick GP (0.096; 95% CI: 0.082 to 0.109). The optimal values for GT measurements were 1.15mm for the maxillary jaw, 1.02mm for the mandibular jaw, 1.02mm for males, and 1.09mm for females.
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT exhibited notable precision in diagnosing GT, while demonstrating minimal disparities compared to the conventional transgingival probing technique, particularly evident in thin GPs, and in the mandibular dental arch. The constraints associated with the utilization of CBCT were observed in the maxillary arch and in cases with thick GP.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted where GP was determined based on the probe transparency method (TRAN). The GT measurements were obtained by both methods at 2mm from the free gingival margin (FGM) for all teeth anterior to the first molar. The data was statistically analysed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plots, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The statistical significance level was set at a P-value<0.05.
RESULTS: The study included 60 subjects (1200 teeth). The mean GT in both the maxillary (1.14±0.17mm) and mandibular (0.94±0.15mm) arches was significantly greater (P<0.05) for the transgingival probing method than for the CBCT method. As shown in the Bland-Altman plot, the bias between the two methods was greater in the maxillary jaw (0.060; 95% CI: 0.044 to 0.076) and in individuals with a thick GP (0.096; 95% CI: 0.082 to 0.109). The optimal values for GT measurements were 1.15mm for the maxillary jaw, 1.02mm for the mandibular jaw, 1.02mm for males, and 1.09mm for females.
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT exhibited notable precision in diagnosing GT, while demonstrating minimal disparities compared to the conventional transgingival probing technique, particularly evident in thin GPs, and in the mandibular dental arch. The constraints associated with the utilization of CBCT were observed in the maxillary arch and in cases with thick GP.
摘要：
目的：牙龈表型（GP）被认为是预测正畸治疗获得良好美学和功能结果的可能性的有价值的指标。这项研究旨在研究锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）的准确性和可重复性，以评估与跨牙龈探查方法相比的两个牙弓的牙龈厚度（GT）。次要目标是使用CBCT确定GT的最佳截止值。
方法：进行了这项横断面研究，其中GP是基于探针透明度方法（TRAN）确定的。对于第一磨牙前的所有牙齿，GT测量均通过两种方法在距游离牙龈边缘（FGM）2mm处获得。数据采用组内相关系数(ICC)进行统计分析，Bland-Altman阴谋,和接收器工作特性(ROC)曲线。统计学显著性水平设定为P值<0.05。
结果：该研究包括60名受试者（1200颗牙齿）。上颌（1.14±0.17mm）和下颌（0.94±0.15mm）牙弓的平均GT明显高于CBCT方法（P<0.05）。如Bland-Altman情节所示,两种方法之间的偏倚在上颌(0.060;95%CI:0.044~0.076)和GP厚个体(0.096;95%CI:0.082~0.109)中较大.GT测量的最佳值为上颌1.15mm，下颌1.02mm，男性为1.02mm，女性为1.09毫米。
结论：CBCT在诊断GT方面表现出显著的准确性，虽然与传统的跨牙龈探查技术相比差异最小，在薄薄的全科医生中尤其明显，在下颌牙弓。在上颌弓和GP较厚的病例中观察到与CBCT使用相关的限制。
方法：进行了这项横断面研究，其中GP是基于探针透明度方法（TRAN）确定的。对于第一磨牙前的所有牙齿，GT测量均通过两种方法在距游离牙龈边缘（FGM）2mm处获得。数据采用组内相关系数(ICC)进行统计分析，Bland-Altman阴谋,和接收器工作特性(ROC)曲线。统计学显著性水平设定为P值<0.05。
结果：该研究包括60名受试者（1200颗牙齿）。上颌（1.14±0.17mm）和下颌（0.94±0.15mm）牙弓的平均GT明显高于CBCT方法（P<0.05）。如Bland-Altman情节所示,两种方法之间的偏倚在上颌(0.060;95%CI:0.044~0.076)和GP厚个体(0.096;95%CI:0.082~0.109)中较大.GT测量的最佳值为上颌1.15mm，下颌1.02mm，男性为1.02mm，女性为1.09毫米。
结论：CBCT在诊断GT方面表现出显著的准确性，虽然与传统的跨牙龈探查技术相比差异最小，在薄薄的全科医生中尤其明显，在下颌牙弓。在上颌弓和GP较厚的病例中观察到与CBCT使用相关的限制。
