Logo-japid
J Adv Periodontol Implant Dent. Inpress.
doi: 10.34172/japid.026.3716
  Abstract View: 8

Research Article

Evaluation of gingival biotype and bone thickness in maxillary implant patients: a clinical study based on cone-beam computed tomography

Motahare Damavandi ORCID logo, Razieh Azizian ORCID logo, Narges Shojaei* ORCID logo
*Corresponding Author: Email: shojaei-n@medilam.ac.ir

Abstract

Abstract

Background. The relationship between gingival biotype (GB) and bone thickness is paramount for optimal maxillary implant outcomes. This study aimed to determine the correlation between GB and buccal bone thickness (BBT) and height (BBH) in candidates for immediate maxillary implant placement using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) analysis. Methods. This cross-sectional study assessed 54 patients from the Periodontology Department at Ilam University of Medical Sciences Dental School. Gingival thickness (GT), bone measurements, and clinical parameters including keratinized gingival width (KGW) and papillary height (PH) were recorded using Michigan probes and CBCT scans. Statistical analyses (Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis) were conducted to evaluate associations between GB, bone thickness, and other factors. Results. Of the participants, 62.96% had a thick GB, and 37.04% had a thin biotype. Thin biotypes were significantly more prevalent among females (p<0.05). Significant differences were observed in KGW and papilla depth between biotypes (p<0.05), while no significant difference was found in PH (p>0.05). The mean BBT for females was 1.66 mm in thick GB and 1.03 mm in thin GB (p<0.05). The mean BBH was 16.63 mm (females) and 14.91 mm (males) in thick GB, compared to 14.53 mm (females) and 12 mm (males) in thin GB (p>0.05). Conclusion. Thick GB was associated with greater BBT and KGW, while no statistically significant differences were observed in BBH or PH between gingival biotypes. Thin GB was more prevalent among female participants.

First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Comments
Security code


Abstract View: 9

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Download: 0

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


Submitted: 27 Nov 2024
Revision: 23 Feb 2026
Accepted: 24 Feb 2026
ePublished: 16 Mar 2026
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)