Effect of Eruption Status of the Mandibular Third Molar on Distal Caries in the Adjacent Second Molar

Abstract

Impaction depth and angulation of the MTM are associated with distal caries in the MSM. Angulation of the MTM is more stable and reliable than the CEJ distance between the distal MSM and the mesial MTM for the estimation of risk factors related to the MTM.

Impacted lower third molars and distal caries in the mandibular second molar. Is prophylactic removal of lower third molars justified?

“…The influence of the contact point location between the second and third molars on the formation of second molar distal caries has been well documented in the literature, with similar findings to the ones of our sample (14,17). In our opinion, contact points below the CEJ are more difficult to clean, leading to higher plaque accumulation.…”

“…Authors such as Kang et al (17) reported even higher figures (52%), probably due to the use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) to diagnose caries. According to the present study, the prevalence of L2M distal caries ranges from 20.6 – 30.2%, confirming the findings reported by Özeç et al (14), in a Turkish population (20%), and van der Linden et al (32%) (26).…”

“…Regarding the angulation of the impacted tooth, most authors state that a mesioangular tilt seems to be highly associated with caries occurrence, while vertical, distoangular or ectopic impactions are unlikely to originate this pathology (6,8,13-15,17-19,25). However, the present study shows that a horizontal angulation might also be an important risk factor.…”

“…It has been suggested that the initiation and severity of distal caries in second molars increases over time, and that older patients have higher incidences of this complication (17,25). Nevertheless, the results of the present study did not show any relation between these 2 factors, probably due to the low mean age of the sample.…”

Influence of Non‐Impacted Third Molars on Pathologies of Adjacent Second Molars: A Retrospective Study

“…Similar to previously reported data, 4 influence of N‐M3s on A‐M2 pathologies in this study appears to be weaker than the influence of I‐M3s. Although some researchers have shown that M2s adjacent to I‐M3s of different impact patterns (e.g., full bony I‐M3s or soft‐tissue I‐M3s) might suffer different risks for pathologies, 4 , 27 , 32 I‐M3s were not classified into different levels in this study. The main purpose of this preliminary study was to identify whether N‐M3s adversely affect A‐M2s.…”