Download now
Tissue biotype is one of the critical factors that determine the consequence of prosthodontic treatment. Initial gingival thickness anticipates the outcome of any implant procedures or any restorative treatment options. It has been documented that sufferers with slim gingival biotype were very likely to experience gingival recession following implant and restorative methods. [2] The thicker biotype prevents mucosal recession, hides the restorative margins and camouflages the titanium pelisse shadows. It also preserves neurological seal around implants, thus reducing the crestal cuboid resorption. Heavy biotypes include flat soft tissue and bony structures, denser and even more fibrotic smooth tissue with large amount of fastened masticatory mucosa, it is more resistant to virtually any acute trauma and respond to disease by pocket development and infra bony problem. The gingival thickness affects the treatment outcome possibly due to difference inside the amount of blood supply to the underlying bone fragments and susceptibility to resorption. [8],[12],[15] Skinny gingival biotype is related to a thin band of the keratinized tissue and scalloped gingival contour which suggest slim bony structure and is even more sensitive to any inflammation or trauma. [8],[13],[14]
The capacity of the gingival tissue to cover any fundamental material is crucial for getting aesthetic benefits, especially in instances of implant, restorative the field of dentistry, where subgingival metal restorations are mainly used. In this examine, the metal periodontal probe was used in the sulcus to evaluate gingival tissues thickness because it is a reliable, objective, economical and minimally intrusive method as periodontal probing procedures will be routinely performed during any aesthetic, regenerative, and pelisse treatments. [2],[16]
In the present study gingival biotype presented a substantial difference between male and female subjects. These types of results are in accordance with studies conducted by Muller et ‘s., [18] whom stated 1/3rd of the test to be females with a thin biotype and Vandana ain al, analyzed on 32 individuals revealed thicker gingiva in men reporting a generalized thin masticatory mucosa for females. [26] R. G. Shiva manjunath et approach stated that 44. 7% of females have thin gingival biotype and seventy six. 9% of males possess thick biotype. Gingival biotype in females varies with age as opposed to in males. [19] De Rouck ain al., in his study also stated a significant difference between male and female subjects. He concluded that 84% of all scored central incisors of male participants demonstrated thick biotype compared to females participants. [4] According to a survey done by Bhat et ‘s., the fuller biotype is more prevalent in male population whereas the feminine population consists of thin and scalloped biotype. [24]
Present analyze showed significant correlation of biotype with crown level, sulcus interesting depth, width of attached gingiva, papilla elevation. It is according to studies conducted by Anand et ‘s who explained shallower sulcus depth can be expected in teeth with thin biotype, [25] Malhotra et ‘s where significant correlation is available between crown heights, width of fastened gingiva, papilla height. [1] Whereas analyze conducted by Zweers ainsi que al, confirmed narrow sector of attached gingiva in teeth with thick biotype and large zone of attached gingiva in pearly whites with slender biotype. [27 ]
In present research no correlation exists among crown width and biotype which is in accordance with study done by Make et ing but examine conducted by simply Olsson ain al revealed significant correlation between biotype and crown width. [28]
Regarding the correlation among gingival biotype and the teeth form in maxillary and mandibular tooth, no significant correlation exists between biotype and teeth form in maxillary and mandibular trasero teeth, mandibular anterior tooth whereas very significant relationship exists between biotype and tooth contact form in maxillary anterior teeth, suggesting possibly difficulty in classifying biotype in mandible or difference in biotype exists between maxilla and mandible as well as among anterior and posterior teeth in same patient. In present research the average of every tooth was calculated in the data accumulated showed zero correlation of biotype between anterior and posterior the teeth form. This current study effects showed maxillary anterior since more relevant teeth for identifying gingival biotype than maxillary posteriors and mandibular teeth. Thus far all gingival classifications utilized maxillary informe teeth since reference for identifying the gingival biotype for both the teeth arches. [22]
