Difference in clinical crown length of maxillary central incisors and gingival display at rest and during smiling based on gender

Nadia Atina Zaini; Rasmi Rikmasari; Lisda Damayanti

doi:10.24198/pjd.vol25no1.26781

Difference in clinical crown length of maxillary central incisors and gingival display at rest and during smiling based on gender

Nadia Atina Zaini, Rasmi Rikmasari, Lisda Damayanti

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of gender on the degree of maxillary central incisors and associated gingival display when the lips are at rest and during smiling. Methods: A total of 65 subjects (40 females [61.5%]; 25 males [38.5%]) of Malaysian Malay community studied in UNPAD were included in the study. All of the subjects had all natural anterior teeth present with no caries, extreme occlusal wear, restorations, extrusion, obvious deformities, or tooth mobility. The visible portions of the maxillary central incisor, and associated gingival at rest and smiling were measured vertically from the lower border of the upper lip to the incisal edge of the incisors. The measurements were measured using an electronic digital caliper and repeated three times. The mean value was calculated and statistical analyses were performed by Student t test. Results: Outcome of the study indicated that there is marked difference statistically (p < 0.05) with the clinical crown length display at rest (CCLR). However, the clinical crown length display during smiling (CCLS) and gingival display during smiling (GD) differences is non significant (p > 0.05) between these two genders. Conclussion: Females displayed more clinical crown length of maxillary central incisors than males at rest. During smiling, no gender differences in maxillary central incisors display were recorded, however, females displayed more maxillary gingival than males.

Keywords

clinical crown length, gingival display, gender

Full Text:

PDF

References

Rufenacht CR. Fundamentals of Aesthetics. London: Quintessence Publishing: 18. 1990

Qualtrough AJ, Burke FJ. A look at dental esthetics. Quintessence Int. 25:7-14. 1994

Sheets CG. Modern dentistry and the esthetically aware patient. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. special issue.1987. 103-105 pp.

Levin JB. Esthetic diagnosis, In Current Opinion in Cosmetic Dentistry. Golub Evan J, Philadelphia, Current Science: 9-17. 1995.

Thompson L, Malmberg J, Goodell, N, Boring R. The distribution of attention acrossDiscourse Processesatalker‘s.38:145-168. 2004 face.

Garber DA, Salama MA. The aesthetic smile: diagnosis and treatment. Periodon 2000. 1996;11:18-28.

Ackerman MB, Ackerman J. Smile analysis and design in the digital era. J. Clin. Orthod. 2002;36(5):221-36.

Van der Geld P, Oosterveld P, Kuijpers-Jagtman, A.M. Age related changes of the dental aesthetic zone at rest and during spontaneous smiling and speech. European J Ort. 2008;30(1):366-373.

Tjan AHL, Miller GD, The JGP. Some esthetic factors in a smile. J. Prosthent. Dent. 1984;51(1):24-28.

Landa LS. Practical guidelines for complete denture esthetics. Dent. Clin. North. Am. 1977;21(2):285-298.

Behrend DA. An improved esthetic control system. Int. J. Pros. 1988;1(2):80-86.

Al-Wazzan KA. The visible portion of anterior teeth in rest position. J Contemporary Dent Practice. 2004;5(2):1-7.

Peck S, Peck L, Kataja M. The gingival smile line. Angle Orthod. 1992;62(2):91-100.

Owens EG, Goodacre CJ, Loh PL. A multicenter interracial study of facial appearance. Part 2: A comparison of intraoral parameters. Int. J. Pros. 2002;15(3):283-8.

Kapagiannidis D, Kontonasaki E, Bikos P, Koidis, P. Teeth and gingival display in the premolar area during smiling in relation to gender and age. J. Oral Rehabil. 2005;32(1):830-837.

Oguz O. The proportion of the face in younger adults using the thumb rule of Leonardo da vinci. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy; 1966;18:2.

Sabri R. The eight components of a balanced smile. JCO, Inc volume XXXIX. 2005;3:155-167.

Jensen J, Joss A, Lang NP. The smile line of different ethnic groups in relation to age and gender. Acta Med Dent. 1999;4:38-46

Connor AM, Moshiri F. Orthognathic surgery norms for American black patients. Am. J. Orthod. 1985;87(2):119-34.

Vig RG, Brundo GC. Kinetics of anterior tooth display. J Pros Dent. 1978;39(5):502-4.

Ahmad I. Anterior dental aesthetics: dentofacial perspective. Br. Dent. J. 2005;199:81-88.

Zarp GA, Bolender CL, Carlsson GE. Boucher’s prosthodont for edentulous patients. 11th ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby. 1997. p. 191. 224.

McCord JF, Grant AA. Prosthetic Dentistry. British Dent J. 2000. p.71-74.

Hasanreisoglu U, Berksun S, Aras K, Arslan I. An analysis of maxillary anterior teeth: facial and dental proportions. J Pros Dent. 2005;94:530-538.

Ballard ML. Asymmetry in tooth size, a factor in etiology, diagnosis and treatment of malocclusion. Angle Orthodontist. 1944;14(2):67-71.

Albino JE, Tedesco LA, Conny DJ. Patient perceptions of dental-facial esthetic: shared concerns in orthodontics and prosthodontics. J Pros Dent. 1984;52(1):9-13.

Di Biase DD. Class II malocclusion: making the face fit. Dent. Update. 1991;6(2):429-35.

Matthews TG. The anatomy of a smile. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1978;39(2):128-134.

Farrow AL, Zarinna K, Azizi K. Bimaxillary protrusion in black Americans- an esthetic evaluation and treatment considerations. Am. J Ort Dent Orthop. 1993;104(3):240-250.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24198/pjd.vol25no1.26781