Journal of Oral Health and Community Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 3 ( September-December, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Prevalence of Gingival Biotype in Correlation with the Morphology of Maxillary Central Incisors and Its Variation among Three Ethnic Groups of Malaysian Subpopulations

Kishor Tom

Keywords : Papillary height, Thick biotype, Thin biotype, Varying forms

Citation Information : Tom K. Prevalence of Gingival Biotype in Correlation with the Morphology of Maxillary Central Incisors and Its Variation among Three Ethnic Groups of Malaysian Subpopulations. J Oral Health Comm Dent 2021; 15 (3):129-133.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10062-0119

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 27-01-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


The gingival perspective in restorative dentistry is important in harmonizing esthetics and biological function. In this regard, the gingival biotypes have been stated to be thick or thin. Patients with the thin biotype are more prone to recession, inflammation, and compromised soft tissue response. The correct recognition of gingival biotypes is important for the treatment planning process in restorative and implant dentistry. The purposes of the survey were to evaluate the prevalence of the gingival biotype in correlation with the morphology of maxillary central incisors and its variation among three ethnic groups of Malaysian subpopulations and the prevalence of different gingival biotypes in individuals with varying forms of maxillary central incisors. Materials and methods: A total of 300 individuals who were periodontally healthy, visiting the outpatient department of AIMST Dental Institute, Kedah, Malaysia, in the age range of 18–50 years, participated in the survey. Then, 100 participants from each race, that is, Chinese, Malay, and Indian, were further subdivided into two groups based on age as group I (18–30 years) and group II (30–50 years). Three clinical parameters were recorded by one examiner. This included the crown width/crown length (CW/CL) ratio of the two central incisors, papillary height (PH), and gingival thickness. The measurements were tabulated and evaluated. Results: There was a highly significant correlation between gingival biotype and crown length and area of papilla with p values of −0.002 and 0.013, respectively. Significant correlation was found between area of crown and PH with p values −0.013 and 0.016. The results of discriminant function analysis showed that the average crown length was the best single determinant of biotype and area of papilla was the next best choice. The thinner biotype was more prevalent in young Chinese and Malay population with medium forms of maxillary central incisors while the young Indian population had thicker biotypes and wide and short form of maxillary central incisors. The older group in both Chinese and Malay populations have no difference in their gingival biotype regardless of their crown form. In the older Indian population, gingival biotype is thicker with a short and wide form of maxillary central incisors. Decreased papillary height was observed in the thinner biotypes in younger Chinese and Malay populations but thicker in young Indian population. Conclusion: Within the limits of the current investigation, the existence and correlation of different gingival biotypes and dentopapillary complex dimension has been confirmed. These findings can be utilized as objective guidelines for determining the biotype and response of gingiva to many dental operative procedures.

  1. Huang LH, Neiva RE, Wang HL. Factors affecting the outcomes of coronally advanced flap root coverage procedure. J Periodontol 2005;76:1729–1734.
  2. Fu JH, Yeh CY, Chan HL, et al. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. J Periodontol 2010;81:569–574. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2009.090591.
  3. Müller HP, Schaller N, Eger T, et al. Thickness of masticatory mucosa. J Clin Periodontol 2000;27(9):621–626.
  4. Claffey N, Shanley D. Relationship of gingival thickness and bleeding to loss of probing attachment in shallow sites following nonsurgical periodontal therapy. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13:654–657. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1986.tb00861.x.
  5. Greenberg J, Laster L, Listgarten MA. Transgingival probing as a potential estimator of alveolar bone level. J Periodontol 1976;47: 514–517. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1976.47.9.514.
  6. De Rouck T, Eghbali R, De Bruyn H, et al. The gingival biotype revisited: Transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:428–433. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01398.x.
  7. Müller HP, Barrieshi-Nusair KM, Könönen E. Repeatability of ultrasonic determination of gingival thickness. Clin Oral Investig 2007; 11(4):439–442. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-007-0125-0. Epub 2007 May 24.
  8. Barriviera M, Duarte WR, Januario AL, et al. A new method to assess and measure palatal masticatory mucosa by cone beam computerized tomography. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:564–568. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01422.x.
  9. Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, et al. Gingival biotype assessment in the esthetic zone: Visual versus direct measurement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2010;30:237–243. PMID: 20386780.
  10. Olsson M, Lindhe J, Marinello CP. On relationship between crown form and clinical features of the gingival in adolescents. J Clin Periodontol 1993;20:570–577. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1993.tb00773.x.
  11. Eghbali A, DeRouck T, De Bruyn H, et al. The gingival biotype assessed by experienced and inexperienced clinicians. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:958–963. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01479.x.
  12. Cook DR, Mealey BL, Verrett RG, et al. Relationship between clinical periodontal biotype and labial plate thickness: An in vivo study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2011;31:345–354. PMID: 21837300.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.