Abstract
Aim and objective: The objective of this in-vivo study was to evaluate gingival thickness of mid buccally and interdentally in primary, mixed & permanent dentition.Method: The study included 40 subjects (22 males and 18 females) with 480 sites of an age range 4-25 Years. Subjects were divided into 3 groups – the primary dentition (4-6 years) mixed dentition (7-13 years) and adult dentition (16-25 years). All the parameters were measured in upper and lower anterior segments.Results: Gingival thickness (GT) was measured arch wise and tooth wise in different dentition and overall dentition wise without differentiating arch wise and toothwise. Gingival thickness (GT) was significantly higher (p=.001) in mixed dentition midbuccally (1.3 +0.46) and interdentally (2.31+0.71) in both the arches. GT (MB) was significantly higher in primary dentition (1.4+0.5) and GT (ID) was significant in mixed dentition (2.6+0.7).Conclusion: Gingival thickness increases from primary to mixed dentition and significantly higher in maxilla.
Highlights
The gingival unit is subject to morphological changes due to normal pattern of oral development
The assessment of facial gingival thickness by transgingival probing into human subjects, and the correlation with the age, gender and dental arch in the anterior segment is scanty
The selected volunteers were divided among three groups- Group A- Primary dentition, Group B- mixed dentition, Group C – permanent dentition. (As mentioned in part 1 and part 2) In the first visit, plaque index (Silness & Loe 1964) and gingival bleeding index (Ainamo and Bay1975) were recorded followed by scaling and polishing
Summary
The gingival unit is subject to morphological changes due to normal pattern of oral development. The term gingival or periodontic phenotype has been coined (Müller & Eger 1997) to address a common clinical observation of great variation in thickness and width of facial keratinized tissue (Müller & Eger 1997).It was observed that increase amount of recession is followed in subject with thin and vulnerable gingiva following non surgical periodontal ligament therapy. The thickness was assessed by the bone sounding technique or the transgingival probing method in dentate subjects, only the palatal masticatory mucosa was evaluated (Muller et al 2000). Medline search using keyword's gingival thickness, primary, mixed and permanent dentition revealed few studies. This study (Part 3) was conducted to evaluate and compare the gingival thickness midbuccally and interdentally, in primary, mixed and permanent dentition. The actual study comprises of recording of gingival sulcus depth, attached gingiva width, and gingival thickness in primary, mixed and permanent dentition. Measurement of sulcus depth and attached gingiva width in three dentitions is conducted in part 1 and part 2 respectively
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
