Extraction of first permanent molar teeth: results from three dental hospitals

Albadri, Sondos; Zaitoun, Halla; McDonnell, S. T.; Davidson, L. E.

doi:10.1038/bdj.2007.679

Cited by 61 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Albadri et al [24] reported similar findings, in which children who underwent FPM extractions were older than the age allowing optimal spontaneous space closure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…In one report, the principal indication for extraction of FPM was extensive caries (70%) followed by hypomineralization of the molar incisors (11%) [24]. Accordingly, in our systematic review, we included studies that addressed the consequences of early extraction of “compromised FPMs”, i.e., FPMs with severe caries or hypomineralization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to determine the sequelae of early extraction of compromised first permanent molars (FPMs) with regard to the skeletal and dental development of 5- to 15-year-old children. Meta-analysis was conducted when applicable.MethodsOur research protocol included a search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and a data extraction plan. The search engines used were PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct. Study selection was performed independently by three reviewers. Articles published from 1960 to 2017 were reviewed based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was performed to compare space closure between upper and lower arches.ResultsEleven studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The consequences were decrease in post extraction space, accelerated development and eruption of second permanents molars (SPMs) and third molars, a decrease in caries and/or fillings on the proximal surfaces of adjacent teeth, lingual tipping and retrusion of incisors, and counter clockwise rotation of the occlusal plane.ConclusionThere were several consequences of early extraction of FPMs, which were related to skeletal and dental development. Our systematic review suggests that comprehensive evaluation of the compromised FPMs should be performed before planning an extraction. The ideal time for FPM extraction is when the SPM is at the early bifurcation stage in order to achieve complete closure of the extraction space by the SPM. Benefits should be weighed over the risks to decrease the risk of unfavorable outcomes as much as possible. However, due to the limited evidence on the outcomes and variables that influence them, high-quality prospective studies are needed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12903-018-0516-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Albadri et al [24] reported similar findings, in which children who underwent FPM extractions were older than the age allowing optimal spontaneous space closure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, neg ative consequences of the extraction of the first permanent molars are numerous, and primarily conditioned by the number and time of their extraction. The research by Albadri 15 et al has shown that even in 70% of cases, caries with bad prognosis is the reason for the extraction of the first permanent molars, and in 11% of cases that is molar-incisor hypomineralization. In addition, this group of authors suggested that the average time of the first permanent molars extraction is the age of 11, which is substan tially later than the time recommended in case when the extraction of these teeth is necessary, and that is the age between year 8 and 10 16 .…”

Section: Zaključakmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of the first permanent molars caries prevalence in younger and older school children

Stojković¹,

Apostolovic²,

Igić³

et al. 2012

Acta stomatologica Naissi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UvodPrvi stalni molari su najčešće prvi stalni zubi koji niču u ustima deteta. Ovi funkcionalno značajni zubi čoveka predstavljaju i veoma značajne indikatore za pojavu karijesa stalnih zuba i značajne pokazatelje uspešnosti primene preventivno-profilaktičkih i terapijskih mera 1,2 . zbog svega navedenog, ispitivanje prevalencije karijesa ovih zuba bio je predmet istraživanja brojnih autora koji su konstatovali da prevalencija karijesa prvih stalnih molara kontinuirano raste sa uzrastom ispitanika. Istraživanja su pokazala da već u uzrastu od šest godina, kada ovaj zub najčešće niče, između 5 i 12% dece ima makar jedan kariozni, ekstrahovani ili plombirani (KEP) prvi stalni molar 3,4 . Procenat dece uzrasta od 12 godina, koji imaju makar jedan KEP na prvim stalnim molarima, uglavnom premašuje 50%. Međutim, većina podataka o prevalenciji karijesa prvih stalnih molara je starijeg datuma i oni se uglavnom odnose na zemlje razvijenog sveta, dok su podaci o stanju zdravlja ovih zuba kod dece na našem području prilično oskudni. Stoga se nameće potreba za podrobnijom analizom stanja zdravlja prvih stalnih molara kod dece našeg regiona, kao i za utvrđivanjem najkritičnijeg perioda u kome dolazi do značajnog porasta prevalencije karijesa ovih zuba. CiljCilj ovog istraživanja bio je da se na uzorku dece sa teritorije Grada Niša izvrši uporedna analiza prevalencije, proseka i strukture karioznih, ekstrahovanih i plombiranih (KEP) prvih stalnih molara kod dece mlađeg u odnosu na decu starijeg školskog uzrasta.

show abstract

“…However, it has been suggested that there is little evidence to support this being a significant risk [8]. Furthermore, the extraction of an additional FPM places an increased burden on both the child and the dental team providing care for them, and may tip the balance of decision as to whether the extractions can be carried out under local anesthesia, towards favoring dental general anesthesia [9]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should I eXtract Every Six dental trial (SIXES): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Innes

Borrie

Bearn

et al. 2013

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundExtraction of lower first permanent molars in children is common. There is uncertainty among clinicians as to whether a ‘compensating extraction’ (removal of the upper first permanent molar to prevent it over erupting) is necessary despite current guidelines recommending this. As a result, unnecessary dental extractions may be carried out or children may be failing to receive extractions required to achieve optimal long-term oral health. In addition, the decision to extract fewer or more teeth affects management options (local anesthetic injections alone, inhalation sedation or general anesthesia) needed to support the child with the surgical procedure(s).The SIXES (Should I eXtract Every Six) dental trial investigates clinical effectiveness and quality of life for conventional treatment (following the guideline of compensation extraction of the upper first permanent molar) compared with the alternative intervention (removal of lower first permanent molars but no extraction of the upper).Methods/DesignThis is a multicenter, two-arm parallel group randomized clinical trial. Allocation will be web-based randomization. Practitioners in primary and secondary care settings, reflecting the points of presentation and treatment of eligible patients, will recruit 400 children, aged 7 to 11 years requiring extraction of lower first permanent molars but who have upper first permanent molars of good prognosis. Baseline measures (prior to treatment) and outcome data (at one and five years, or when the patient reaches 14 years of age) will be assessed through study models and child/parent questionnaires.The primary outcome measure is degree of tipping of the lower second permanent molar, (favorable outcome is tipping less than 15°).The secondary outcomes are type of anesthetic/sedation used, residual spacing (between lower second premolar and second permanent molar), orthodontic treatment requirement, quality of life, and over-eruption in the intervention group. Assessors will be blinded where possible.DiscussionSIXES dental trial investigates whether compensating extraction of upper first permanent molars should be carried out following loss of lower first permanent molars. Currently dentists and orthodontists face a dilemma in clinical decision-making, relying on the lowest level of evidence - expert opinion. SIXES will provide evidence to support decision-making and inform practices and may result in reduced tooth extractions.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT01591265

show abstract

Extraction of first permanent molar teeth: results from three dental hospitals

Cited by 61 publications

References 12 publications

Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review

Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review

Comparative analysis of the first permanent molars caries prevalence in younger and older school children

Should I eXtract Every Six dental trial (SIXES): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About