Gingival phenotype assessment methods and classifications revisited: a preclinical study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare gingival phenotype assessment methods based on soft tissue transparency on different backgrounds and assessor experience levels.

METHODS

For this purpose, 24 gingival specimens were retrieved from pig jaws with tissue thicknesses from 0.2 to 1.25 mm. Three methods were assessed: periodontal probe PCP12 (thin/thick), double-ended periodontal probe DBS12 (thin/moderate/thick) and colour-based phenotype probe CBP (thin/moderate/thick/very thick). Each sample was photographed with each probe underneath and categorized whether the probe was visible or not using different coloured backgrounds. To measure experience level influence, dentists, dental undergraduate students and laypersons (n = 10/group) performed the evaluation.

RESULTS

PCP12 probe showed a threshold between 0.4 and 0.5 mm. To distinct between thin and moderate thick gingiva, a comparable range for DBS12 was found while moderate thickness was between 0.5 and 0.8 mm and for thick above 0.8 mm. CBP also showed a comparable threshold of 0.5 mm for thin versus moderate as compared with the other methods; above 0.8 mm, predominantly a very thick tissue was measured. In general, the background colour had a minor impact on PCP12 and DBS12, and investigator experience showed no clear influence on GP assessment.

CONCLUSION

Based on probe transparency and within the limitation of a preclinical study, we suggest GP differentiation into three entities: thin (< 0.5 mm; high risk), moderate (0.5-0.8 mm; medium risk) and thick (> 0.8 mm; low risk).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

All three GP assessment methods are easy to perform and seem to have a high predictive value with a three entities classification for DBS12 and CBP.