Supplementary Files
Keywords
Abstract
Introduction: Adequate buccal plate thickness sustains alveolar bone remodelling without significant peri-implant bone resorption, thereby, preventing peri-implant bone defects like fenestrations and dehiscences, and maintaining the integrity of overlying soft tissues.
Objective: To assess the buccal plate thickness in the maxillary and mandibular posterior dentition using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Methods: An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Kantipur Dental College Teaching Hospital and Research Centre, from 2021 December to 2023 July. After ethical approval, CBCT scans obtained from 60 participants in the age range of 21-49 years, selected through non-probability convenience sampling, fulfilling all the inclusion and exclusion criteria, were retrospectively analysed for buccal plate thickness at three measurement points, 1 mm, 3 mm, and 5 mm from the crest, with an additional measurement from cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the crest, on 1,440 roots, using Carestream (CS) 3D imaging software version 3.5.18. The data were then compared between jaws, measurement points, sides, and genders using SPSS v.20 software.
Results: In the maxilla, the thinnest buccal plate was presented by mesiobuccal root of first molar at 1 mm, and by first premolar at 3 mm and 5 mm, while the thickest buccal plate was presented by mesiobuccal and distobuccal roots of second molar at 5 mm, and at 1 mm and 3 mm respectively. In the mandible, first premolar had the thinnest buccal plate while distobuccal root of second molar had the thickest buccal plate at all three measurement points.
Conclusions: The study presented the tendency of buccal plate to increase in thickness from anterior to posterior, and from coronal to apical along the roots, in both jaws. No significant differences could be determined between right and left sides, or between genders.
References
Merheb J, Quirynen M, Teughels W. Critical buccal bone dimensions along implants. Periodontol 2000. 2014 Oct;66(1):97-105.
Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Feb;32(2):212-8.
Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. J Clin Periodontol. 1996;23(10):971-3.
Araújo MG, Sukekava F, Wennström JL, Lindhe J. Ridge alterations following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Jun;32(6):645-52.
Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites. J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Oct;31(10):820-8.
Shiratori LN, Marotti J, Yamanouchi J, Chilvarquer I, Contin I, Tortamano-Neto P. Measurement of buccal bone volume of dental implants by means of cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(7):797-804.
Vandenberghe B, Jacobs R, Yang J. Diagnostic validity (or acuity) of 2D CCD versus 3D CBCT-images for assessing periodontal breakdown. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007 Sep;104(3):395-401.
Benic GI, Mokti M, Chen CJ, Weber HP, Hämmerle CHF, Gallucci GO. Dimensions of buccal bone and mucosa at immediately placed implants after 7 years: a clinical and cone beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 May;23(5):560-6.
Moreira CR, Sales MAO, Lopes PML, Cavalcanti MGP. Assessment of linear and angular measurements on three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographic images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009 Sep;108(3):430-6.
Fokas G, Vaughn VM, Scarfe WC, Bornstein MM. Accuracy of linear measurements on CBCT images related to presurgical implant treatment planning: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(S16):393-415.
Januário AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the facial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study: Dimension of the facial bone wall. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Oct;22(10):1168-71.
El Nahass H, N. Naiem S. Analysis of the dimensions of the labial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2015 Apr;26(4):e57-61.
Zekry A, Wang R, Chau ACM, Lang NP. Facial alveolar bone wall width - a cone-beam computed tomography study in Asians. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(2):194-206.
Temple KE, Schoolfield J, Noujeim ME, Huynh-Ba G, Lasho DJ, Mealey BL. A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study of buccal plate thickness of the maxillary and mandibular posterior dentition. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Sep;27(9):1072-8.
Kolte AP, Kolte RA, Pakhmode RAV. Assessment of buccal and lingual alveolar bone width in the posterior region at dentate and edentulous sites: A cone-beam computed tomography study. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2020 Feb;24(1):26-31.
López-Jarana P, Díaz-Castro CM, Falcão A, Falcão C, Ríos-Santos JV, Herrero-Climent M. Thickness of the buccal bone wall and root angulation in the maxilla and mandible: an approach to cone beam computed tomography. BMC Oral Health. 2018 Nov 21;18(1):194.
Van der Weijden F, Dell’Acqua F, Slot DE. Alveolar bone dimensional changes of post-extraction sockets in humans: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2009 Dec;36(12):1048-58.
Mardas N, Macbeth N, Donos N, Jung RE, Zuercher AN. Is alveolar ridge preservation an overtreatment? Periodontol 2000. 2023 Oct;93(1):289-308.
Grunder U, Gracis S, Capelli M. Influence of the 3-D bone-to-implant relationship on esthetics. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005 Apr;25(2):113-9.
Spray JR, Black CG, Morris HF, Ochi S. The Influence of Bone Thickness on Facial Marginal Bone Response: Stage 1 Placement Through Stage 2 Uncovering. Ann. Periodontol. 2000;5(1):119-28.
Qahash M, Susin C, Polimeni G, Hall J, Wikesjö UME. Bone healing dynamics at buccal peri-implant sites. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Feb;19(2):166-72.
Nohra J, Dagher M, Matni G, Mokbel N, Jobaili E, Naaman N. Effect of Primary Stability and Soft- and Hard-Tissue Thickness on Marginal Bone Loss: A Prospective Pilot Study. Implant Dent. 2018 Oct;27(5):542-6.