Logo-japid
J Adv Periodontol Implant Dent. 2026;18(2): 90-97.
doi: 10.34172/japid.026.3716
  Abstract View: 116
  PDF Download: 60

Original Article

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

Motahare Damavandi 1 ORCID logo, Razieh Azizian 2 ORCID logo, Narges Shojaei 2* ORCID logo

1 Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2 Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran
*Corresponding Author: Narges Shojaei, Email: shojaei-n@medilam.ac.ir

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 buccal bone height (BBH) in candidates for immediate maxillary implant placement using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Methods. This cross-sectional study assessed 54 patients from the Periodontology Department at Ilam University of Medical Sciences Dental School. Gingival thickness (GT), buccal bone measurements (BBT and BBH), 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 tests) were conducted to evaluate associations between variables, with P<0.05 considered significant.

Results. Of the participants, 62.96% had a thick GB and 37.04% had a thin GB. Thin biotypes were significantly more prevalent among females (P<0.05). The thick GB group exhibited significantly greater KGW and overall mean BBT compared to the thin GB group (P<0.05). Conversely, no statistically significant differences were observed between thick and thin biotypes regarding overall mean BBH or PH (P>0.05).

Conclusion. A thick gingival biotype is anatomically associated with greater buccal bone thickness and keratinized gingival width. However, there were no statistically significant differences in buccal or papillary bone height between the different gingival biotypes. Thin gingival biotypes are more prevalent among females.


First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Comments
Security code


Abstract View: 117

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Download: 60

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)