Authors' response

Abstract

Thank you very much for your scientific contributions to our article. We will try to answer the questions you raised.1.Transgingival probing is reported to be one of the most reliable methods for determining the thickness of the gingiva.1Gürlek Ö. Sönmez Ş. Güneri P. Nizam N. A novel soft tissue thickness measuring method using cone beam computed tomography.J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018; 30: 516-522Crossref PubMed Scopus (13) Google Scholar When the endodontic spreader is inserted into the soft tissue at an oblique angle in the apical direction, compatible with the miniscrew placement, full contact of the silicon stopper to the gingiva will not be achieved. In addition, because of the anatomy of the alveolar bone, it would be difficult to obtain accurate and reliable measurements with a silicon stopper that only contacts the gingiva from certain points.2.To eliminate systematic errors, the device was calibrated before the gingival thickness measurements, and all the measurements were performed by a single investigator. Moreover, all necessary measurements were taken in the experimental units to minimize random errors and ensure homogeneity. Because the measurement points were redetermined in the second set of measurements performed 10 minutes after the first, more than one site was measured in each region.3.Similar to gingival thickness, individual and regional differences in cortical bone thickness are expected because of the positive correlation between muscle function and cortical bone thickness.2Horner K.A. Behrents R.G. Kim K.B. Buschang P.H. Cortical bone and ridge thickness of hyperdivergent and hypodivergent adults.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 142: 170-178Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (53) Google Scholar Although a standardized penetration force would cause the endodontic spreader to cross the soft tissue and go through the alveolar bone in some patients or in some regions of the jaw, it could be limited to only the soft tissue in others. Therefore, all subjects should be evaluated individually, and the measurements should be performed precisely.4.Because significant differences were determined between some of the groups, the gingival thicknesses of the left and right sides were evaluated separately. These statistically significant but small differences observed in some groups might result from sex, age distribution, and tooth position.5.The thickness of the gingiva is determined to be influenced by age, sex, development and growth, tooth shape and position, facial type, and different anatomic sites in the mouth.3Vandana K.L. Savitha B. Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location.J Clin Periodontol. 2005; 32: 828-830Crossref PubMed Scopus (120) Google Scholar In this study, the association between the gingival thickness of only one of the common miniscrew insertion sites and different facial types was evaluated. Other common miniscrew insertion sites might be evaluated in future studies. Thickness of buccal attached gingiva at miniscrew insertion sitesAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsVol. 158Issue 2PreviewWe are intrigued by the article evaluating the thickness of posterior buccal attached gingiva at common miniscrew insertion sites by Drs Alkan and Kaya in the December 2019 issue (Alkan Ö, Kaya Y. The thickness of posterior buccal attached gingiva at common miniscrew insertion sites in subjects with different facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2019;156:800-807). It is much appreciated that the authors explored the factors affecting decisions about the choice of miniscrews from various perspectives. Full-Text PDF