Malatya Bölgesinde Dişeti Çekilmesinin Yaygınlığının, Şiddetinin ve Etkenlerinin Araştırılması

Year 2013, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 29 - 33, 01.04.2013

Abubekir Eltaş Vesile Elif Toy

Abstract

Bu çalışma Malatya bölgesinde yaşayan 20-65 yaş arasındaki bireylerde dişeti çekilmesi DÇ ’ninnedenlerini, şiddetini ve yaygınlığınıdeğerlendirmeyi amaçladı. Bu kesitsel çalışma 2012 Mayıs ve Temmuz ayları arasında İnönü Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesinebaşvuran 20 - 65 yaş arasındaki 309 erkek ve 378 kadından oluşan toplam 687 hastada gerçekleştirildi. Katılımcıların periodontal durumuplak indeksi Pİ , sondalamada kanama SK , sondalama derinliği SD ve klinik ataçman seviyesi KAS kullanılarak değerlendirildi.Dişeti çekilmeleri Miller sınıflamasına göre değerlendirildi. Elde edilen verilerin analizi Ki-kare test ile gerçekleştirildi. Bu çalışmaya dahiledilen bireylerin %78’inde dişeti çekilmesi olduğu görüldü. Yaş artışı özellikle 40 yaşın üzerindeki bireylerde dişeti çekilmesi görülen dişsayısında artışa sebep oldu. Yaş artışı ile birlikte Sınıf III ve IV çekilmelerde artış görüldü. 20-29 yaş arası bireylerde görülen vakaların %40.8’ini Sınıf III ve IV oluştururken, 30 – 39 yaş arasında %62.3’ünü, 40-49 arasında %76.3’ünü, 50 yaş üzerindeki bireylerde ise%71.9’unu oluşturduğu görüldü. En çok DÇ görülen bölgenin alt keser dişler olduğu görüldü. DÇ için birincil nedensel faktörünperiodontal hastalıklar ve yetersiz ağız bakımı olduğu görüldü. DÇ ağız bakım uygulamaları ve ağız sağlığı bilincinin arttırılmasıylaönlenebilir

Keywords

Dişeti çekilmesi, periodontal hastalık, etyoloji, görülme sıklığı, yaşlanma

Evaluation of the Prevalence, Severity and Etiology of Gingival Recession in Malatya Region

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaulate the etiology, severity and prevalence of gingival recession among people aged between 20 and 65living in Malatya region. This cross-sectional study was performed on 687 patients including 309 males and 378 females, 20-65 years oldwho applied for treatment at Inönü University Faculty of Dentistry from May to July 2012. The periodontal status of the subjects wereassessed by using the plaque index PI , bleeding of probing BOP , probing depth PD and clinical attachment level CAL . Therecessions were further scored according to the Miller classification. Statistical analysis of the results was accomplished using chi-squaretest. Gingival recession was observed in 78% of the subjects examined during the study. The increase in age led to an increase in thenumber of teeth with gingival recession especially among the subjects aged more than 40 years. Class III and IV recessions displayed anincreasing occurrence with the increase in age. Forty point eight percent of the recessions seen among subjects aged between 20 and 29were Class III and IV recessions, while 62.3% between 30 and 39, 76.3% between 40 and 49, 71.9% more than 49, respectively. Themandibular central incisors were the most frequently affected area by gingival recession. Periodontal disease and poor oral hygieneappeared to be the primary etiological factors for gingival recession. Gingival recession can be prevented by improving oral hygieneprocedures and developing awareness of oral health

Keywords

Gingival recession, periodontal disease, etiology, prevalence, aging

References

• 1. Kleber BM, Schenk HJ. Etiology of gingival recessions. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1989; 44: 845–8.
• 2. Kassab MM, Cohen RE. Theetiology and prevalence of gingival recession. J Am Dent Assoc 2003; 134(2): 220–5.
• 3. American Academy of Periodontology. Consensus report. Mucogingival therapy. Ann Periodontol 1996, 1: 702-6.
• 4. American Academy of Periodontology. Glossary of Periodontal Terms 3th ed, Chicago; 1992.
• 5. Wennström JL. Mucogingival therapy. Ann Periodontol 1996; 1: 671-701.
• 6. Chrysanthakopoulos NA. Aetiology and severity of gingival recession in an adult population sample in Greece. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2011; 8(2): 64–70.
• 7. Smith RG. Gingival recession: reappraisal of an enigmatic condition and a new index for monitoring. J ClinPeriodontol 1997; 24: 201-5.
• 8. Kurtiş B, Bodur A, Uraz A. Lokalize Dişeti Çekilmelerinin Tedavisinde Laterale Pozisyone Flep Operasyonu Tekniğinin Klinik Etkinliği. GU Diş Hek Fak Derg 2002; 19 (3); 1-7.
• 9. Loe H, Anerud A, Boysen H. The natural history of periodontal disease in man: prevalence, severity, andextent of gingival recession. J Periodontol 1992; 63(6): 489–95.
• 10. Khocht A, Person P. Gingival recession in relation to history of hard tooth brush use. J Dent Res 1992; 71: 226 (Abstract).
• 11. GormanWJ. Prevalence and etiology of gingival recession. J Periodontol 1967; 38: 316-22.
• 12. Watson PJC. Gingival recession. J Dent 1984; 12: 29-35.
• 13. Kundapur PP, Bhat KM, Bhat GS. Association of trauma from occlusion with localized gingival recession in mandibular anterior teeth. DRJ 2009; 6(2): 71–4.
• 14. Susin C, Haas AN, Oppermann RV, et al. Gingival recession: epidemiology and risk indicators in a representative urban Brazilian population. J Periodontol 2004; 75: 1377–86.
• 15. Lindhe J, Karring T, Lang NP. Clinical Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, 3rd Edn. Copenhagen, Munksgaard, 1998.
• 16. Khuller N. Coverage of gingival recession using tunnel connective tissue graft technique. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2009; 13(2): 101-5.
• 17. Tugnait A, Clerehugh V. Gingivalrecession– its significance and management. J Dentistry 2001; 29: 381–94.
• 18. O’Leary TJ, Drake RB, Naylor JE. The plaque control record. J of Periodontol 1972; 43: 38.
• 19. Lang NP, Nyman S, Senn C, Joss A. Bleeding on probing as it relatest oprobing pressure and gingival health. J Clinic Periodontol 1991;18: 257–61.
• 20. Miller PD Jr. A classification of marginal tissue recession. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1985; 5(2): 8-13.
• 21. Toker H, Ozdemir H. Gingival recession: epidemiology and risk indicators in a university dental hospital in Turkey. Int J Dent Hygiene 2009; 7: 115–20.
• 22. Marini MG, Greghi SLA, Passanezi E, et al. Gingival recession: prevalence, extension and severity in adults. J Appl Oral Sci 2004; 12(3): 250-5.
• 23. Murray JJ. Gingival recession in tooth types in high fluoride and low fluoride areas. J Periodontal Res 1973; 8(4): 243–51.
• 24. Hangorsky U, Bisada NB. Clinical assessment of free gingival graft effectiveness on the maintenance of periodontal health. J Periodontol 1980, 51: 274-8.
• 25. El Haddad SA, Abd El Razzak MY, El Shall M. Use of pedicled buccal fat pad in root coverage of severe gingival recession defect. Case report. J Periodontol 2008, 79: 1271-9.
• 26. Drisko C. Oral hygiene and periodontal considerations in preventing and managing dentine hypersensitivity. International Dental Journal 2007; 57(S6): 399–410.
• 27. Alghamdi H, Babay N, Sukumaran A. Surgical management of gingival recession: a clinical up- date. Saudi Dental Journal 2009; 21(2): 83–94.
• 28. Mumghamba EG, Honkala S, Honkala E, et al. Gingival recession, oral hygiene and associated factors among Tanzanian women. East Afr Med J 2009; 86(3): 125–32.
• 29. Johnson BD, Mulligan K, Kiyak HA et al. Agingordisease? Periodontal changes and treatment considerations in the older dental patient. Gerodontology 1989; 8: 109-18.
• 30. Van Palenstein Helderman WH, Lembariti BS, van der Weijden GA, et al. Gingival recession and its association with calculus in subjects deprived of prophylactic dental care. J ClinPeriodontol 1998; 25(2): 106–11