Quintessence Int. 2021;52(5):394-401. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.b937015.
Transgingival probing is often used in the clinic to assess gingival thickness. However, what is not completely known is how well this method represents the true value of soft tissue thickness. The aim of this study was to assess differences and variation in gingival thickness when measured with transgingival probing or scanned with an intraoral device.
This ex vivo study evaluated gingival thickness on 20 porcine cadavers. Gingival thickness was assessed at both central and lateral mandibular incisors through transgingival probing with a standard metal periodontal probe and also using intraoral scanning, which was considered as the method providing the 'true value' of soft tissue thickness. Intra-examiner repeatability and method error were evaluated.
No evidence of systematic difference for any of the mandibular central or lateral incisors (mandibular right incisors: mean difference -0.17 to -0.01 mm, and mandibular left incisors: mean difference -0.11 to 0.04 mm) was observed between the periodontal probe and intraoral scanning methods. The absolute differences between the repeated measurements with intraoral scanning for each tooth type (n = 30) were calculated: the overall median was 0.089 mm and the interquartile range was 0.080 mm.
Transgingival probing with a standard metal periodontal probe for assessing gingival thickness is a reliable method, with values very close to the true gingival thickness, and it can thus be considered as the clinical gold standard.
临床中常通过牙间探诊来评估牙龈厚度，但牙间探诊与真实软组织厚度之间的关系尚不完全明确。本研究旨在评估牙间探诊与口腔内扫描两种方法测量牙龈厚度时的差异和变异性。
本离体研究共纳入 20 个猪下颌骨标本。通过标准金属牙周探针进行牙间探诊和口腔内扫描，评估下颌中切牙和侧切牙的牙龈厚度，后者被视为提供软组织真实厚度的“金标准”。评估了内检者间重复性和方法误差。
两种方法测量下颌中切牙和侧切牙时，均未发现任何牙齿的系统性差异（下颌右侧切牙：平均差值-0.17 至-0.01 mm；下颌左侧切牙：平均差值-0.11 至 0.04 mm）。计算每颗牙类型（n=30）口腔内扫描重复测量的绝对差值：总体中位数为 0.089 mm，四分位间距为 0.080 mm。
使用标准金属牙周探针进行牙间探诊评估牙龈厚度是一种可靠的方法，其结果与真实牙龈厚度非常接近，可作为临床金标准。
