牙周健康的上颌前牙唇侧嵴顶上牙龈的三维形态分析

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2021.05.030

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 利用锥形束体层摄影术(cone-beam computed tomography,CBCT)分析牙周健康的汉族青年上颌前牙唇侧中央嵴顶上牙龈(supraosseous gingiva,SOG)的三维形态及相关解剖结构。方法: 选取25名牙周健康的汉族青年共计150颗上颌前牙纳入研究,受试者男性11名,女性14名,平均年龄(24.5±1.6)岁,佩戴含有显影剂的硅橡胶印模拍摄软组织间接显影CBCT。对影像资料进行三维重建并测量分析唇侧中央嵴顶上牙龈的形态,包括SOG高度、釉牙骨质界(cemento-enamel junction,CEJ)到骨嵴顶的距离、CEJ处牙龈厚度、骨嵴顶下2 mm牙槽骨厚度等。数据用SPSS 22.0软件进行统计分析,比较各牙位参数之间的差异,分析其相互之间的相关关系。结果: 上颌前牙唇侧中央SOG高度测量结果,中切牙为(3.54±0.67) mm、侧切牙为(3.48±0.81) mm、尖牙为(3.49±0.70) mm,各牙位SOG高度差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。上颌前牙唇侧中央CEJ水平牙龈平均厚度测量结果,中切牙为(1.45±0.23) mm,侧切牙为(1.13±0.24) mm,尖牙为(1.14±0.22) mm,中切牙牙龈最厚,与侧切牙和尖牙相比差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。唇侧中央SOG与CEJ处牙龈厚度在所有牙位上均无明显相关性(P>0.05)。结论: 牙周健康的上颌前牙唇侧嵴顶上牙龈中,中切牙牙龈最厚,未发现上颌前牙区唇侧中央SOG高度与厚度存在相关性。

关键词: 锥束计算机体层摄影术, 牙龈, 成像, 三维

Abstract:

Objective: To measure the three-dimensional morphology of the labial supraosseous gingiva (SOG) and the thickness of related labial bone in maxillary anterior teeth of periodontally healthy Han nationality youth using soft tissue indirect imaging cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: Twenty-five periodontally healthy subjects (11 males and 14 females) with 150 maxillary anterior teeth were involved in this study. A special impression with radiopaque material including the maxillary teeth was made, then a CBCT scan with the elastomeric matrix in position was taken for each subject. The imaging data were generated and transferred to a volumetric imaging software in which three-dimensional reconstruction was conducted and the image analyses were carried out. Measurements were made at the site of labial center of the maxillary anterior teeth. The height of the SOG, the distance between cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and bone crest, the gingival thickness at the CEJ, and the thickness of bone 2 mm below the labial bone crest were measured and the correlation analysis between the parameters was made. All the data analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0. The data were analyzed with ANVOA and Pearson correlation tests with the significance level at α=0.05. Results: The mean SOG values were (3.49±0.70) mm, (3.48±0.81) mm, and (3.54±0.67) mm for central incisors, lateral incisors and canines, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences among the different sites (P>0.05). The mean gingival thickness values were (1.45±0.23) mm, (1.13±0.24) mm, (1.14±0.22) mm for central incisors, lateral incisors and canines, respectively. The gingival thickness of the central incisors was the largest among the maxillary anterior teeth with statistically significant difference (P<0.05). No correlation was found between the SOG and gingival thickness among the maxillary anterior teeth (P>0.05). Conclusion: The gingival thickness of central incisors was the largest and the supraosseous gingival height had no correlation with gingival thickness among the periodontally healthy maxillary anterior teeth.

Key words: Cone-beam computed tomography, Gingiva, Imaging, three-dimensional

中图分类号:

R783

杨刚,胡文杰,曹洁,柳登高. 牙周健康的上颌前牙唇侧嵴顶上牙龈的三维形态分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 990-994.

Gang YANG,Wen-jie HU,Jie CAO,Deng-gao LIU. Three-dimensional morphology analysis of the supraosseous gingival profile of periodontally healthy maxillary anterior teeth[J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(5): 990-994.

图/表 3

图1

表1

基于软组织间接显影CBCT测量上颌前牙唇侧中央CEJ与骨嵴顶之间的距离、CEJ处牙龈厚度及SOG高度"

Teeth	CEJ-BC/mm, $x ?$ ±s	SOG/mm, $x ?$ ±s	GT/mm, $x ?$ ±s	BT/mm, $x ?$ ±s
Central incisor	1.70±0.43^*	3.54±0.67	1.44±0.23^*	1.19±0.25
Lateral incisor	1.95±0.50	3.48±0.81	1.13±0.24	1.05±0.34^*
Canine	1.88±0.58	3.49±0.71	1.14±0.22	1.22±0.42

表1

表2

不同性别受试者上颌前牙唇侧中央CEJ与骨嵴顶之间的距离、CEJ处牙龈厚度及SOG高度"

Teeth	Gender	CEJ-BC/mm, $x ?$ ±s	SOG/mm, $x ?$ ±s	GT/mm, $x ?$ ±s	BT/mm, $x ?$ ±s
Central incisor	Male	1.69±0.45	3.54±0.59	1.43±0.27	1.19±0.28
	Female	1.70±0.42	3.45±0.63	1.47±0.20	1.19±0.23
Lateral incisor	Male	1.94±0.60	3.54±0.78	1.16±0.31	1.05±0.41
	Female	1.95±0.45	3.56±0.75	1.11±0.19	1.05±0.29
Canine	Male	1.73±0.40	3.59±0.57	1.23±0.23^*	1.32±0.52
	Female	1.98±0.65	3.43±0.76	1.09±0.20	1.14±0.32

表2

参考文献 24

[1]	Arora R, Narula S, Sharma R, et al. Supracrestal gingival tissue: Assessing relation with periodontal biotypes in a healthy periodon-tium [J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2013, 33(6):763-771. doi: 10.11607/prd.1501
[2]	Perez JR, Smukler H, Nunn M E. Clinical evaluation of the supraosseous gingivae before and after crown lengthening [J]. J Periodontol, 2007, 78(6):1023-1030. pmid: 17539715
[3]	Gargiulo AW, Wentz FM, Orban B. Dimensions and relations of the dentogingival junction in humans [J]. J Periodontol, 1961, 32(3):261-267. doi: 10.1902/jop.1961.32.3.261
[4]	Kois JC. Altering gingival levels: The restorative connection part I: Biologic variables [J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 1994, 6(1):3-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1994.tb00825.x
[5]	Vacek JS, Gher ME, Assad DA, et al. The dimensions of the human dentogingival junction [J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 1994, 14(2):154-165.
[6]	Fischer KR, Grill E, Jockel-Schneider Y, et al. On the relationship between gingival biotypes and supracrestal gingival height, crown form and papilla height [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2014, 25(8):894-898. doi: 10.1111/clr.2014.25.issue-8
[7]	乐迪, 张豪, 胡文杰, 等. 牙周探诊法判断牙龈生物型的初步研究 [J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2012, 47(2):81-84.
[8]	曹洁, 胡文杰, 张豪, 等. 基于锥形束计算机体层摄影术测量牙龈厚度 [J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2013, 45(1):135-139.
[9]	张艳玲, 张豪, 胡文杰, 等. 120名汉族青年前段牙弓唇侧角化龈宽度的测量 [J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2010, 45(8):477-481.
[10]	Zhang YL, Le D, Hu WJ, et al. Assessment of dynamic smile and gingival contour in young Chinese people [J]. Int Dent J, 2015, 65(4):182-187. doi: 10.1111/idj.12174
[11]	Perez JR, Smukler H, Nunn ME. Clinical dimensions of the supraosseous gingivae in healthy periodontium [J]. J Periodontol, 2008, 79(12):2267-2272. doi: 10.1902/jop.2008.080101 pmid: 19053916
[12]	Cao J, Hu WJ, Zhang H, et al. A novel technique for measurement of dentogingival tissue by cone beam computed tomography [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol, 2015, 119(2):e82-e87. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2014.10.022
[13]	Alves PHM, Alves TCLP, Pegoraro TA, et al. Measurement pro-perties of gingival biotype evaluation methods [J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2018, 20(3):280-284. doi: 10.1111/cid.2018.20.issue-3
[14]	Hausmann E, Allen K, Clerehugh V. What alveolar crest level on a bite-wing radiograph represents bone loss? [J]. J Periodontol, 1991, 62(9):570-572. pmid: 1941497
[15]	Ghassemian M, Nowzari H, Lajolo C, et al. The thickness of facial alveolar bone overlying healthy maxillary anterior teeth [J]. J Periodontol, 2012, 83(2):187-197. doi: 10.1902/jop.2011.110172 pmid: 21692627
[16]	Nowzari H, Molayem S, Chiu CH, et al. Cone beam computed tomographic measurement of maxillary central incisors to determine prevalence of facial alveolar bone width ≥2 mm [J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2012, 14(4):595-601. doi: 10.1111/cid.2012.14.issue-4
[17]	Taylor R. Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: A basic review [J]. J Diagn Med Sonogr, 1990, 6(1):35-39. doi: 10.1177/875647939000600106
[18]	Kao RT, Fagan MC, Conte GJ. Thick vs thin gingival biotypes: A key determinant in treatment planning for dental implants [J]. J Calif Dent Assoc, 2008, 36(3):193-198.
[19]	Müller HP, Könönen E. Variance components of gingival thickness [J]. J Periodontal Res, 2005, 40(3):239-244 pmid: 15853970
[20]	Fu JH, Yeh CY, Chan HL, et al. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology [J]. J Periodontol, 2010, 81(4):569-574. doi: 10.1902/jop.2009.090591
[21]	La Rocca AP, Alemany AS, Levi P Jr. Anterior maxillary and mandibular biotype: Relationship between gingival thickness and width with respect to underlying bone thickness [J]. Implant Dent, 2012, 21(6):507-515. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e318271d487
[22]	Frumkin N, Via S, Klinger A. Evaluation of the width of the alveolar bone in subjects with different gingival biotypes: A prospective cohort study using cone beam computed tomography [J]. Quintessence Int, 2017, 48(3):209-216.
[23]	Cook DR, Mealey BL, Verrett RG, et al. Relationship between clinical periodontal biotype and labial plate thickness: An in vivo study [J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2011, 31(4):345-354.
[24]	Batista EL, Moreira CC, Batista FC, et al. Altered passive eruption diagnosis and treatment: A cone beam computed tomography-based reappraisal of the condition [J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2012, 39(11):1089-1096. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2012.01940.x pmid: 22966787

相关文章 15

[1]	刘思民,赵一姣,王晓燕,王祖华. 动态导航下不同深度环钻定位精确度的体外评价[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 146-152.
[2]	邱淑婷,朱玉佳,王时敏,王飞龙,叶红强,赵一姣,刘云松,王勇,周永胜. 姿势微笑位口唇对称参考平面的数字化构建及初步应用验证[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 193-199.
[3]	袁临天,马利沙,刘润园,齐伟,张栌丹,王贵燕,王宇光. 计算机模拟亚甲基蓝与牙龈卟啉单胞菌部分蛋白的分子对接[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 23-30.
[4]	任国勇,吴雪梅,李颖,李婕妤,孙伟平,黄一宁. 大血管闭塞性脑卒中亚急性期磁敏感血管征的表现[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(6): 1133-1138.
[5]	李媛,林红,张铁军. 对比传统成像与数字成像对牙科复合树脂X射线阻射性的影响[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 995-1001.
[6]	邵振兴,宋庆法,赵宇晴,崔国庆. 一种结合线袢固定的关节镜下“嵌入式”喙突移位术:手术技术及术后影像学分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 896-901.
[7]	吴一凡,张晓圆,任爽,玉应香,常翠青. 基于磁共振的青年男性股四头肌的测量和评估[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 843-849.
[8]	郜洪宇,孟焕新,侯建霞,黄宝鑫,李玮. 钙结合蛋白在健康牙周组织和实验性牙周炎组织的表达分布[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(4): 744-749.
[9]	李新飞, 彭意吉, 余霄腾, 熊盛炜, 程嗣达, 丁光璞, 杨昆霖, 唐琦, 米悦, 吴静云, 张鹏, 谢家馨, 郝瀚, 王鹤, 邱建星, 杨建, 李学松, 周利群. 肾部分切除术前CT三维可视化评估标准的初步探究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(3): 613-622.
[10]	胡迪,张苗,康惠颖,彭芸. 0~2岁婴幼儿磁共振脑白质模板的建立及验证[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 341-347.
[11]	陈迪,徐翔宇,汪明睿,李芮,臧根奥,张悦,钱浩楠,闫光荣,范田园. 熔融沉积成型3D打印盐酸维拉帕米胃漂浮制剂的制备与体外评价[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 348-354.
[12]	黄新瑞,李莎,高嵩. 冷冻电镜成像中噪声的滤波方法进展[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 425-433.
[13]	穆海丽,田福聪,王晓燕,高学军. 玻璃体和通用型复合树脂耐磨性的临床对照研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 120-125.
[14]	高璐,谷岩. 中国人群腭中缝形态特点分期与Demirjian牙龄的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 133-138.
[15]	岳兆国,张海东,杨静文,侯建霞. 数字化评估CAD/CAM个性化基台与成品基台影响粘接剂残留的体外研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 69-75.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed