Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Dimensions of the healthy gingiva and peri-implant mucosa
Franci Institute, Padova, Italy.
Franci Institute, Padova, Italy.
Franci Institute, Padova, Italy.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2893-3676
Department of Neurosciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, ISSN 0905-7161, E-ISSN 1600-0501, Vol. 26, no 6, p. 657-662Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: To determine the dimensions of the soft tissue cuff present at various aspects of teeth and to compare these dimensions to those of the mucosa surrounding single implants. Material and methods: Fifty volunteers were recruited that were ≥25 years of age and exhibited no signs of (i) untreated caries; (ii) loss of periodontal tissue support in the incisor, canine, and premolar regions; (iii) systemic or local disease. Furthermore, among the 50 patients recruited (iV), 27 had one single implant in the maxilla with teeth present mesial and/or distal to the implant. Probing pocket depth (PPD) and transmucosal sounding depth (TS) were assessed by five experienced, carefully calibrated examiners and with the use of a periodontal probe at the proximal (mesial, distal) and flat (facial, buccal and palatal/lingual) surfaces of all teeth/implants. The width of the keratinized mucosa (KM) was also determined. Results: It was demonstrated that (i) PPD and TS were greater at proximal than at flat surfaces at both tooth and implant sites. In addition, both PPD and TS were deeper at implant than at tooth sites. The TS values documented that the cuff of healthy soft tissue that surrounded a tooth varied between 2 mm at flat surfaces and 4 mm at proximal surfaces, while at implant sites, the mucosa at proximal as well as flat surfaces was 1–1.5 mm greater. Conclusion: The probing pocket depth (PPD) and the transmucosal sounding depth (TS) values were greater at proximal than at flat, that is, facial/palatal (lingual) surfaces at tooth sites and frequently also at implant sites. Furthermore, the PPD and the TS dimensions were greater at implant than at adjacent tooth sites.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2015. Vol. 26, no 6, p. 657-662
Keywords [en]
implants, probing depth, teeth, transmucosal sounding, Adult, Alveolar Process, Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Dental Implants, Single-Tooth, Gingiva, Humans, Maxilla, Mouth Mucosa, Periodontal Index
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-6662DOI: 10.1111/clr.12359ISI: 000353407000007PubMedID: 24611985Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84928211207Local ID: 26906OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-6662DiVA, id: diva2:1403612
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2025-10-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Toia, Marco

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Toia, Marco
In the same journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 63 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf