Do pathologies associated with impacted lower third molars justify prophylactic removal? A critical review of the literature

Adeyemo, WL

doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.08.015

Cited by 101 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Justifications for prophylactic SRIMTM include the need to minimize the risk of disease development, reduction of the risk of mandibular angle fracture, increased difficulty of surgery with age and as the third molars have no definite role in the mouth [21]. A study on dentigerous cystic changes with radiographically normal IMTM carried out by Greeshma et al [22] supports routine SRIMTM.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Retrospective Study of 1198 Cases to Assess Indications for Surgical Removal, and Correlation with Age, Sex and Type of Impaction—A Single Institutional Experience

Patel¹,

Mansuri²,

Shaikh³

et al. 2016

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To study the incidence of mandibular third molar impaction in relation to type and side of impaction, age and sex of patients and indications for its surgical removal through data collected from a single institute over a period of 3 and half years. Methods The records of 1198 patients who underwent the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars were reviewed retrospectively. Records were divided into groups according to sex, age, type and side of impaction. Radiographs were studied to determine angular position of impacted mandible third molar. Results We found that there was a high incidence of mesioangular lower third molar impaction (33.97 %), highest number of patients were found in 15-30 years of age group (48.33 %), a left side (56.93 %) was more commonly involved, female predominance (63.44 %) was observed and recurrent pericoronitis (33.81 %) was the most common indication. Conclusion Awareness of the indications for surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar to the patients will help to avoid future risk of complications and morbidity associated with the same. This will not only help in saving time and money but also prevents the psychological trauma associated with delayed treatment. Removal of only symptomatic IMTM seems to be the logical choice in view of financial constraint in developing countries like India but at the same time early removal offers freedom from future complications in selected cases. So surgeons should apply a meticulous approach in selecting the patients for SRIMTM.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Retrospective Study of 1198 Cases to Assess Indications for Surgical Removal, and Correlation with Age, Sex and Type of Impaction—A Single Institutional Experience

Patel¹,

Mansuri²,

Shaikh³

et al. 2016

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some reports have estimated that the proportion of impacted third molars that are removed when no clinically sound justification for surgery is present is between 18 and 50.7%. Justifications for prophylactic surgery include the need to minimize the risk of disease (cysts and tumors) development, reduction of the risk of mandibular angle fracture, increased difficulty of surgery with age, and that third molars have no definite role in the mouth [3].…”

Section: Genesis Of Wisdom Teethmentioning

confidence: 99%

Third Molars: A Threat to Periodontal Health??

Kaveri

Prakash

2011

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The third molars have received the fair amount of interest in literature. It has been blamed for problems such as-lower incisor crowding, atypical facial pain, caries etc. They are considered as 'waste bins' in dental practices as they are regarded as functionally non-essential. While making the clinical decision, they are given less importance and often extraction is considered to be the treatment option. Despite periodontal problems that can arise with extracted third molars, retention of third molars can also lead to periodontal problems with the adjacent teeth in addition to teeth farther to third molars. Of late, it is very important to consider the periodontal problems while making the clinical decision. This review paper has been discussed keeping this as prime objective.

show abstract

“…1 Prophylactic surgical removal is often suggested to avoid potentially severe complications of this condition. 2 Although indications for prophylactic removal of lower third molars are limited, 3 they continue to be a contentious point of discussion. 4 Oral surgeons and orthodontists recommend prophylactic removal of third molars before roots are fully formed and further indicate that this procedure will prevent the eruption of the teeth in a malposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiographic assessment of lower third molar eruption in different anteroposterior skeletal patterns and age-related groups

Jakovljević

Lazic

Soldatović

et al. 2014

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To analyze radiographic predictors for lower third molar eruption among subjects with different anteroposterior skeletal relations and of different age groups. Materials and Methods: In total, 300 lower third molars were recorded on diagnostic digital orthopantomograms (DPTs) and lateral cephalograms (LCs). The radiographs were grouped according to sagittal intermaxillary angle (ANB), subject age, and level of lower third molar eruption. The DPT was used to analyze retromolar space, mesiodistal crown width, space/width ratio, third and second molar angulation (a, c), third molar inclination (b), and gonion angle. The LC was used to determine ANB, angles of maxillar and mandibular prognathism (SNA, SNB), mandibular plane angle (SN/MP), and mandibular lengths. A logistic regression model was created using the statistically significant predictors. Results: The logistic regression analysis revealed a statistically significant impact of b angle and distance between gonion and gnathion (Go-Gn) on the level of lower third molar eruption (P , .001 and P , .015, respectively). The retromolar space was significantly increased in the adult subgroup for all skeletal classes. The lower third molar impaction rate was significantly higher in the adult subgroup with the Class II (62.3%) compared with Class III subjects (31.7%; P , .013). Conclusion:The most favorable values of linear and angular predictors of mandibular third molar eruption were measured in Class III subjects. For valid estimation of mandibular third molar eruption, certain linear and angular measures (b angle, Go-Gn), as well as the size of the retromolar space, need to be considered. (Angle Orthod. 2015;85:577-584.)

show abstract

Do pathologies associated with impacted lower third molars justify prophylactic removal? A critical review of the literature

Cited by 101 publications

References 44 publications

Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Retrospective Study of 1198 Cases to Assess Indications for Surgical Removal, and Correlation with Age, Sex and Type of Impaction—A Single Institutional Experience

Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Retrospective Study of 1198 Cases to Assess Indications for Surgical Removal, and Correlation with Age, Sex and Type of Impaction—A Single Institutional Experience

Third Molars: A Threat to Periodontal Health??

Radiographic assessment of lower third molar eruption in different anteroposterior skeletal patterns and age-related groups

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About