Evaluation of the accuracy of the soft tissue thickness measurements with three different methodologies: an in-vitro study

dc.contributor.authorFerry, Katherine
dc.contributor.authorAlQallaf, Hawra
dc.contributor.authorBlanchard, Steven
dc.contributor.authorDutra, Vinicius
dc.contributor.authorLin, Wie-Shao
dc.contributor.authorHamada, Yusuke
dc.contributor.departmentProsthodontics, School of Dentistryen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-12T17:26:53Z
dc.date.available2022-05-12T17:26:53Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description.abstractBackground Soft tissue thickness (STT) influences esthetics, peri-implant, and periodontal health. Non-invasive methods of STT evaluation include cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) files and registration of DICOM files with an intraoral scan or Standard Tessellation Language (STL) files. This study compares three methodologies: bone sounding, DICOM data alone, and DICOM and STL registration to absolute histomorphologic values. Materials and Methods Five human maxillas, including teeth #s 6-11, provided 90 sites for analysis. For standardization, reference grooves were placed at the cervical margin and the long axis of each tooth. Direct measurements with a no. 25 K-file were completed at the facial soft tissues at 3.00, 5.00, and 7.00 mm from the apical marginal reference. Indirect measures were performed with implant planning software. Histological measurements were rendered with imaging software. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the three techniques for the differences from histologic measurements (α = .05). Results Seventy-two sites were included for final analysis. The overall mean histological STT (mSTT) was 0.73 ± 0.31 mm. Bone sounding overestimated mSTT, 0.22 ± 0.20mm (p<.001); whereas, DICOM alone underestimated mSTT, -0.23 ± 0.19 mm (p<.001). DICOM and STL registration had non-statistically significant differences, -0.04 ± 0.21mm (p = .429). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of DICOM and STL registration achieved the highest agreement with histology (ICC: 0.74). Conclusions DICOM and STL file registration had the highest agreement with histological STT supporting the use of DICOM and STL registration for the evaluation of soft tissue thickness.en_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.citationFerry, K., AlQallaf, H., Blanchard, S., Dutra, V., Lin, W.-S., & Hamada, Y. (2022). Evaluation of the accuracy of the soft tissue thickness measurements with three different methodologies: An in-vitro study. Journal of Periodontology. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.21-0692en_US
dc.identifier.issn1943-3670en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/28968
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1002/JPER.21-0692en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Periodontologyen_US
dc.rightsPublisher Policyen_US
dc.sourceAuthoren_US
dc.subjecthistologyen_US
dc.subjectimagingen_US
dc.subjectperiodontal phenotypeen_US
dc.titleEvaluation of the accuracy of the soft tissue thickness measurements with three different methodologies: an in-vitro studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Ferry2022Evaluation-AAM.pdf
Size:
1.61 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Author's Manuscript
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: