The Use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography to Assess Periodontal Biotype
- 46 Downloads
Purpose of Review
Periodontal biotype is a concept with great relevance to clinical practice. Although numerous factors contribute to determining biotype, including soft/hard tissue thickness, soft/hard tissue contours, amount of keratinized tissue, and tooth shape, gingival thickness has been mostly utilized. The use of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has been recently proposed as a state-of-the-art approach for assessing periodontal biotypes because it provides information relative to both soft and hard tissue dimensions.
When used in conjunction with lip retraction or a dual-scan technique, reliable and reproducible measurements of gingival and alveolar thickness can be made on CBCT scans, with the potential to aid in periodontal biotype assessment.
While current data support the potential use of CBCT for periodontal biotype assessment, the technology in its current state should be used primarily for investigational purposes. The cost and radiation dose need to be considered and additional research is required before implementation into clinical practice.
KeywordsCBCT Periodontal biotype Gingival biotype Soft tissue thickness
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 1.•• Oschenbein C, Ross S. A reevaluation of osseous surgery. Dent Clin N Am. 1969;13(1):87–102. The first publication to propose the concept of flat versus scalloped gingival form and describe the relationship between soft tissue morphology and alveolar bone contour. Google Scholar
- 2.• Seibert J, Lindhe J. Esthetics and periodontal therapy. In: Lindhe, J. editor. Textbook of Clinical Periodontology, 2nd edition. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1989. pp.477–514. Coined the term “periodontal biotype.” Google Scholar
- 3.• Weisgold AS. Contours of the full crown restoration. Alpha Omegan. 1977;70(3):77–89. Proposed a differential response to inflammation; those with a thin/scalloped biotype developed gingival recession in contrast to the periodontal pockets that resulted in subjects with a thick/flat biotype. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.•• Tarnow DP, Magner AW, Fletcher P. The effect of the distance from the contact point to the crest of bone on the presence or absence of the interproximal dental papilla. J Periodontol 1992;63(12):995–6. Demonstrated that the presence or absence of an interdental papilla is dependent upon the distance between the contact points of adjacent teeth and alveolar bone crest. Google Scholar
- 8.Ahmed AJ, Nichani AS, Vanugopal R. An evaluation of the effect of periodontal biotype on inter-dental papilla proportions, distances between and facial and palatal papillae in the maxillary anterior dentition. J Prosthodont. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12640.
- 14.• Rebele SF, Zuhr O, Schneider D, Jung RE, Hürzeler MB. Tunnel technique with connective tissue graft versuscoronally advanced flap with enamel matrix derivative for root coverage: a RCT using 3D digital measuring methods. Part II. Volumetric studies on healing dynamics and gingival dimensions. J Clin Periodontol. 2014;41(6):593–603. Used an optical three-dimensional measurement system on scanned models and showed that “increased gingival thickness was associated with better surgical outcomes in terms of recession reduction and root coverage.” CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Buser DD, Martin W, Belser UC. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;19(Suppl):3–61.Google Scholar
- 17.Evans CDJ, Chen ST. Esthetic outcomes of immediate implant placements. Clin Oral Implan Res. 2008;19(1):73–80.Google Scholar
- 18.Romeo E, Lops D, Rossi A, Storelli S, Rozza R, Chiapasco M. (2008). Surgical and prosthetic management of interproximal region with single-implant restorations: 1-year prospective study. J. Periodontol. 2008;79(6):1048–1055.Google Scholar
- 19.Monje A, Galindo-Moreno P, Tözüm TF, Suárez-López del Amo F, Wang HL. Into the paradigm of local factors as contributors for peri-implant disease: short communication. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2016:31(2):288–292.Google Scholar
- 22.Rasperini G, Acunzo R, Cannalire P. Farronato G. (2015). Influence of periodontal biotype on root surface exposure during orthodontic treatment: a preliminary study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2015;35(5):665–675.Google Scholar
- 25.• Kan JYK, Rungcharassaeng K, Umezu K, Kois JC. (2003). Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: an evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants in humans. J Periodontol. 2003;74(4):557–62. First description of the probe transparency method for determining gingival thickness. Google Scholar
- 26.De Rouck T, Eghbali R, Collys K, De Bruyn H, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype revisited: transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36(5):428–433.Google Scholar
- 28.• Alpiste-Illueca F. Dimensions of the dentogingival unit in maxillary anterior teeth: a new exploration technique (parallel profile radiograph). Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2004;24(4):386–96. Described a radiographic approach to assessing the dimensions of the dentogingival unit. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.Van Dessel J, Nicolielo LFP, Huang Y, Coudyzer W, Salmon B, Lambrichts I, et al. Accuracy and reliability of different cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) devices for structural analysis of alveolar bone in comparison with multislice CT and micro-CT. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2017;10(1):95–105.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 37.• Fu J, Yeh C, Chan H, Tatarakis N, Leong DJM, Wang H. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. J Periodontol 2010;81(4): 569–74. One of the first studies to utilize CBCT scans to evaluate the relationship between patients’ soft tissue morphology and contour of the supporting alveolar bone. Google Scholar
- 41.• Nikiforidou M, Tsalikis L, Angelopoulos C, Menexes G, Vouros I, Konstantinides A. Classification of periodontal biotypes with the use of CBCT. A cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(8):2061–71. Data suggests that CBCT scanning can be used to classify individuals into periodontal biotypes. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 42.• Januário AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the facial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Research 2011;22(10):1168–71. Describes the lip retraction technique for visualizing gingiva via CBCT facilitating measurement of the distance between the gingival margin and the alveolar crest as well as the width of the facial gingiva (biotype). Google Scholar
- 45.• Kim Y, Park J, Kim S, Koo K, Seol Y, Lee Y, et al. (2016). New method of assessing the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2016;46(6):372–81. Describes a novel “dual scan” technique to superimpose a stereolithographic image (STL data) derived from three-dimensional intraoral scans of subjects onto the data from the CBCT DICOM files that might have great potential for measuring the dimensions of the dentogingival unit and alveolar bone. Google Scholar