FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH MILLER CLASS II GINGIVAL RECESSION IN MAXILLARY PREMOLARS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Miller class II recession reaches or extends beyond the mucogingival junction while interproximal tissues are preserved, and should therefore be assessed according to local softtissue parameters. Objective: To determine the proportion of Miller class II recession and analyze selected associated factors in maxillary premolars. Material and methods: This cross-sectional analytical study used baseline data from 78 patients with Miller class I-II recession; Miller class II was the outcome variable. Results: Miller class II accounted for 35.9%. Age, sex, PlI and GI were not significantly associated with Miller class II. Visible recession ≥4 mm, keratinized tissue <3 mm and attached gingiva <2 mm was associated with Miller class II; exploratory logistic regression retained visible recession ≥4 mm and keratinized tissue <3 mm. Side-to-side comparison showed no significant difference, while first premolars had greater visible recession than second premolars without a significant difference in Miller classification. Conclusion: Miller class II was observed in more than one-third of patients, emphasizing careful local soft-tissue and tooth-position assessment before treatment planning.
Keywords
Miller class II, gingival recession, maxillary premolar, keratinized tissue, attached gingiva
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
2. Marschner F, Lechte C, Kanzow P, Hraský V, Pfister W. Systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence and risk factors for gingival recession. J Dent. 2025. 155, 105645. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105645.
3. Kim DM, Bassir SH, Nguyen TT. Effect of gingival phenotype on the maintenance of periodontal health: An American Academy of Periodontology best evidence review. J Periodontol. 2020.91(3), 311-338. doi:10.1002/JPER.19-0337.
4. Barootchi S, Tavelli L, Zucchelli G, Giannobile WV, Wang HL. Gingival phenotype modification therapies on natural teeth: A network meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2020. 91(11), 1386-1399. doi:10.1002/JPER.19-0715.
5. Pini Prato GP, Di Gianfilippo R. On the value of the 2017 classification of phenotype and gingival recessions. J Periodontol. 2021. 92(5), 613-618. doi:10.1002/JPER.20-0487.
6. Imber JC, Kasaj A. Treatment of gingival recession: When and how? Int Dent J. 2021. 71(3), 178-187. doi:10.1111/idj.12617.
7. Carbone AC, Joly JC, Botelho J, Machado V, Avila-Ortiz G, Cairo F, et al. Long-term stability of gingival margin and periodontal soft-tissue phenotype achieved after mucogingival therapy: A systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2024. 51(2),177-195. doi:10.1111/jcpe.13900.
8. Kumar PM, Nagate RR, Chaturvedi S, Al-Ahmari MMM, Al-Qarni MA, Gokhale ST, et al. Importance of periodontal phenotype in periodontics and restorative dentistry: A systematic review. BMC Oral Health. 2024.24, 41. doi:10.1186/s12903-023-03777-3.
9. Aşkın Dİ, Tayman MA, Çelik B, Kamburoğlu K, Özen D. Comparison of gingival and periodontal phenotype classification methods and phenotype-related clinical parameters: Cross-sectional observational study. BMC Oral Health. 2025. 25,620. doi:10.1186/s12903025-06007-0.
10. Löe H. The Gingival Index, the Plaque Index and the Retention Index Systems. J Periodontol. 1967.38(6 Suppl).610-616. doi:10.1902/jop.1967.38.6.610.
11. Tavelli L, Barootchi S, Stefanini M, Zucchelli G, Giannobile WV, Wang HL. Wound healing dynamics, morbidity, and complications of palatal soft-tissue harvesting. Periodontol 2000. 2023. 92(1), 90-119. doi:10.1111/prd.12466.
12. Moosa Y, Samaranayake L, Pisarnturakit PP. The gingival phenotypes and related clinical periodontal parameters in a cohort of Pakistani young adults. Heliyon. 2024. 10(2), e24219. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24219.