1980
DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1980.0200
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hazards of Retained Third Molars in Older Persons: Report of 15 Cases

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

1989
1989
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In line with the studies suggesting that pathological change occurs more frequently after age 20 and is par- ticularly high among individuals aged 20-30, [21][22][23] our study does not correlate with the previous study, as the youngest patient recorded in our study is of 14 years and the oldest patient is of 72 years. Previous reports by various authors recommended age as an indication for surgical removal of impacted, unerupted, and embedded tooth, as the risk of surgical morbidity increases with age.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…In line with the studies suggesting that pathological change occurs more frequently after age 20 and is par- ticularly high among individuals aged 20-30, [21][22][23] our study does not correlate with the previous study, as the youngest patient recorded in our study is of 14 years and the oldest patient is of 72 years. Previous reports by various authors recommended age as an indication for surgical removal of impacted, unerupted, and embedded tooth, as the risk of surgical morbidity increases with age.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…Many authors consider that the extraction of the LTM is reasonable in case of the developed pericoronitis, particularly in combination with deep and complicated caries, apical periodontitis, osteomyelitis, paradental cysts or abscesses [10,17,18,22]. However, a range of researchers, including those who conducted histological examination of the resected tissue, insist on the «preventive» extraction of the intact LTM relying only on the probability of the complications development, which indeed are more frequently observed in this region rather than in other places of a dental arch [6][7][8].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no consensus in the related reference sources on the issue of the indications for the extraction of the intact LTM in case of complications of their eruption. A range of authors, who identified more frequent development of pathological changes in paradental tissue in the region of the LTM, support an idea of the relevance of «preventive» extraction of the intact LTM [4][5][6][7][8][9]. Other authors highlight the relatively low frequency of complications in the «restricted» LTM, which evidences in favor of an expectant treatment [10][11][12][13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…(1,12,13) Some authors believe that all impacted third molars should be extracted whether they are symptomatic or not, because if they later become symptomatic, the risk of post-extraction complications can increase with the patient's age. (14)(15)(16) Conversely, other authors believe that due to lack of evidence and knowledge about the incidence of pathologies or the low rate of most complications associated with third molars, the decision to remove asymptomatic third molars is questionable. (13,14,(17)(18)(19)(20)(21) Recent studies suggest that incidence of pathologies associated with retained third molars is low; hence, the most appropriate treatment for asymptomatic impacted third molars in young adults might be observa-tion instead of prophylactic removal.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%