Journal of Clinical Periodontology and Implant Dentistry

Comparative Assessment of Alveolar Bone Thickness and Its Influence on Soft Tissue Thickness Using CBCT and Transgingival Probing: A Pilot Study

Chittineni Nirosha, Ashank Mishra, Krishnajaneya Reddy


Background: Assessment of periodontal biotype is an important element in clinical practice. The influence of gingival thickness
has been documented in various applications including non-surgical periodontal therapy, mucogingival therapy, guided tissue
regeneration, crown lengthening and implant dentistry. Differences in the gingival and osseous architecture have been shown
to exhibit significant impact on the outcome of restorative therapy. Many methods have been tried in assessing periodontal
biotype, and it is proved that probe visibility is not a reliable indicator in assessing periodontal biotype.Therefore the present
study was conducted to evaluate the association between alveolar bone thickness and overlying soft tissue by comparing the
values obtained by CBCT and transgingival probing.

Aim: The present study is to evaluate the association between alveolar bone thickness and overlying soft tissue thickness by correlating information obtained by transgingival probing and CBCT.

Materials and Methods: Ten systemically healthy patients within the age group of 20-40 were recruited from the outpatient
department of periodontics Sri Sai College of Dental surgery Vikarabad. Examination of the subjects included in the study
begun with the measurement of clinical parameters like gingival recession and attachment loss. To assess the gingival
thickness clinically, transgingival probing was done in lower anteriors. Hard and soft tissue measurements were obtained from cross sectional CBCT scans in lower anterior region. Soft tissue values obtained from CBCT were compared to the values of transgingival probing to test the reliability of clinical method. Hard tissue thickness was correlated with the soft tissue to find out the influence of gingival biotype on labial bone thickness.

Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the labial bone thickness and gingival thickness. Variable
results were found when gingival thickness was assessed using CBCT and transgingival probing.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that gingival thickness varies according to the underlying bone morphology, position of tooth in the arch. Soft tissue CBCT can be considered as one of the best non-invasive method in determining the thickness of the gingival tissue and labial bone.



transgingival probing, CBCT, alveolar bone thickness, soft tissue thickness

Full Text:


Chawla K, Grover HS. Gingival biotype: When thin is not in. J Periodontol Med ClinPract


Zawawi KH, Al-Harthi SM, Al-Zahrani MS. Prevalence of gingival biotype and its relationship to dental malocclusion Saudi Med J 2012;33:671–675.

Hirschfeld I. A study of skulls in the American Museum of Natural History in relation to periodontal

disease. J Dent Res 1923;5:251–265.

Januario AL, Barriviera M, Duartee WR. Soft tissue cone-beam computed tomography: A novel

method for the measurement of gingival tissue and the dimensions of the dentogingival unit. J Esthet Restor Dent 2008;20:366–374.

Olsson M, Lindhe J. Periodontal characteristics in individuals with varying form of the upper

central incisors. J Clin Periodontol 1991;18(1):78–82.

Ochsenbein C, Ross S. A Reevaluation of osseous surgery. Dent Clin North Am 1969;13(1):87–102.

Becker W, Ochsenbein C, Tibbetts L, Becker BE. Alveolar bone anatomicprofiles as measured from dry skulls. J Clin Periodontol 1997;24:727–731.

Carlo, B. Coronally advanced flap procedure for root coverage. Is flap thickness a relevant predictor

to achieve root coverage? A – 19 case series. J Periodontol 1999;70:1077–1084.

Anderegg CR, Metzler D, Nicoll BK. Gingival thickness in guided tissue regeneration and associated

recession at facial furcation defects. J Periodontol 1999;66:397–402.

Stellini E, Comuzzi L, Mazzocco F, Parente N, Gobbato L. Relationships between different tooth

shapes and patient’s periodontal phenotype. J Periodont Res 2013;48:657–662.

Cook DR, Mealey BL, Verrett RG, Mills MP, Noujeim ME, Lasho DJ, Cronin RJ. Relationship between

clinical periodontal biotype and labial plate thickness: An in vivo study. Int J Periodontics Restorative

Dent 2011;31(4):345–354.

Kao RT, Fagan MC, Conte GJ. Thick vs. thin gingival biotypes: A key determinant in treatment

planning for dental implants. J Calif Dent Assoc 2008;36(3):193–198 .


  • There are currently no refbacks.