Influence of mandibular third molar surgical extraction on the periodontal status of adjacent second molars

Passarelli, Pier Carmine; Lajolo, Carlo; Pasquantonio, Guido; D’Amato, Giuseppe; Docimo, R; Verdugo, Fernando; D’Addona, Antonio

doi:10.1002/jper.18-0415

Cited by 47 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(134 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We suspect that when deep pockets have been colonized with a mass of bacteria, it is difficult to completely eliminate these microorganisms using only routine maintenance methods, and more comprehensive and complex treatments (e.g., subgingival scaling) may be needed. Recently, a study on subgingival scaling before mandibular I‐M3 extraction reported that a PD ≥4 mm was still present in 26.4% of M2s after adjacent I‐M3 removal (Passarelli et al, 2019). These results demonstrate that once substantial periodontal destruction of M2s occurs, it is difficult to completely recover in response to M3 removal, even with the aid of certain periodontal therapies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of non‐impacted third molar removal on the periodontal condition of adjacent second molars

Sun

Tian

et al. 2020

Oral Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to determine how the removal of non‐impacted third molars (N‐M3s) affects the periodontal status of neighboring second molars (M2s). Subjects and Methods The periodontal condition of M2s for which the neighboring N‐M3s were removed (more than 6 months previously) and those with intact N‐M3s was analyzed in a cross‐sectional observation study. In an additional case series, periodontal changes in M2s in response to adjacent N‐M3 removal were observed during a 6‐month follow‐up period. Results A total of 457 patients with 1,301 M2s were enrolled in this cross‐sectional observational study. Compared to M2s with neighboring N‐M3s, M2s without neighboring N‐M3s (teeth removed more than 6 months previously) exhibited a 0.27‐mm reduction in the average pocket depth (PD) (p < .001) and a 0.38‐fold reduced risk of at least one probing site with PD ≥5 mm (PD5+) (p < .001). Subsequently, a 41‐case follow‐up study showed that 6 months after neighboring N‐M3 extraction, the PD of the M2s decreased by 0.31 mm (p < .001), while the incidence of PD5+ decreased by 21.9% when compared to the parameters detected before tooth extraction (p = .004). Conclusions Removing N‐M3s was associated with an improved periodontal condition in neighboring M2s.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of non‐impacted third molar removal on the periodontal condition of adjacent second molars

Sun

Tian

et al. 2020

Oral Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are too many factors affect a M2's life span [6,19], that's why to date there is no direct evidence revealing the relationship of M2 loss with their neighboring M3s. It's generally believed that the negative effect of M3s mainly occurred in the distal M2s [9,13,20], thus the prevalence of M2 loss due to diseases in the distal surface may reflect the influence of M3s on the adjacent M2s. On the basis of this assumption, we compared the incidence of distal diseases in extracted M2s adjacent to different status of M3s.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the presence of M3s is generally believed to increase the residual periodontal pockets and caries risks of M2s [24,26,28], the decision on preventive extraction of asymptomatic M3s is hard for dentists and patients [17,29]. Even in most studies, the preventive extraction of M3s can be benefit for the health of neighboring M2s [11,13,14], in many clinical situations, asymptomatic M3s are indeed more likely retained until irreversible damages happen [15,16]. Such evidence were also found in this study (Table 4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Loss of 908 Second Molars in Chinese adults: Consequences of the Presence of Their Neighboring Third Molars?

Sun¹,

Tian²,

Qu³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Many studies have reported that the presence of third molars (M3s) can increase the risk of pathology in neighboring second molars (M2s). However, whether the presence of M3s can effect the mortality of M2s remains unknown. The main aim of this study was to reveal the reasons for M2 loss and how the M2 loss were related to their neighboring M3s. Methods This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. A review of the medical records and radiographic imagines of patients who had their M2(s) removed was undertaken to analyze the reasons for tooth extraction and how those reasons were related to the presence of M3s situated adjacent to the removed M2s. Results Clinical material (from January to March 2019) of 800 patients met the inclusion criteria were involved into this study. M2s in 908 quadrants (i.e. 908 M2s) were removed from these enrolled patients, wherein 382 quadrants were with the absence of M3s and the other 526 quadrants were with the presence of M3s. The average age of patients whose missing M2s had or had no neighboring M3s was 52.4 ± 14.8 years and 56.7 ± 14.9 years respectively (Mann-Whitney U test, p < 0.001). When the reasons for the 908 extracted M2s were traced, it was found that 433 teeth (47.7%) were removed due to caries and sequelae, while 300 teeth (33.0%) were lost for periodontal diseases. In addition, substantial evidence confirmed that 14.4% of the M2s with adjacent M3s were removed due to diseases mainly in the distal surface which were closely related to their neighboring M3s, and it was much higher than that was identified from removed M2s without adjacent M3s (1.8%). Except for residual roots, 42.2% M3s were removed along with neighboring M2s simultaneously. Conclusions The presence of M3s, no matter impacted or erupted M3s, was associated with an earlier loss of their neighboring M2s.

show abstract

“…Just as in total extraction, the prognosis of a DBD continues to challenge clinicians [4]. Most studies have claimed that a DBD of the M2M remains unchanged or improves [5][6][7] but several other studies have suggested that this condition worsens after M3M surgery [8]. The reason for this difference could be because of an unsatisfactory design of the clinical study [9,10] and/or limitations in periodontal-probing factors (pocket depth and attachment loss).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer-aided three-dimensional assessment of periodontal healing distal to the mandibular second molar after coronectomy of the mandibular third molar: a prospective study

Yan

Tan

Xie

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The periodontal healing distal to the mandibular second molar (M2M) after coronectomy of the M3M was controversary. This study aimed to combine a digital method with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and estimate periodontal healing of M2M after M3M coronectomy. An accurate and stable indicator in three dimensions was also tentatively explored. Methods Patients with a M3M in contact with the inferior alveolar canal were included. CBCT was applied immediately after coronectomy (baseline) and 6-months later. Data were investigated with digital software for registration. Previously reported and coronectomy-related factors were included for univariate and multivariate analyses. Results A total of 181 patients (213 M3Ms) completed 6-month follow-up. Significant reduction in the distal intra-bony defect (DBD) depth of the M2M was shown (1.28 ± 1.24 mm, P < 0.001). DBD depth of the M2M at baseline was the most influential factor (r = 0.59), followed by preoperative M3M condition, age, rotation and eruption of the root complex. Remaining enamel (OR = 6.93) and small retromolar space (0.67) contributed to re-contact of the root complex and M2M. Bone volume regenerated in the distal 2 mm was associated significantly with DBD-depth reduction (r = 0.74, P < 0.001). Conclusions Bone volume regenerated in the distal 2 mm of the M2M denoted stability of distal periodontal healing of the M2M. DBD depth at baseline was the most influential factor for healing of a DBD of the M2M after M3M coronectomy. The remaining enamel and a small retromolar space could contribute to re-contact of the root complex and the M2M. Trial registration: China Clinical Trial Center, ChiCTR1800014862. Registered 10 February 2018, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=24216

show abstract

Influence of mandibular third molar surgical extraction on the periodontal status of adjacent second molars

Cited by 47 publications

References 39 publications

Impacts of non‐impacted third molar removal on the periodontal condition of adjacent second molars

Impacts of non‐impacted third molar removal on the periodontal condition of adjacent second molars

Loss of 908 Second Molars in Chinese adults: Consequences of the Presence of Their Neighboring Third Molars?

Computer-aided three-dimensional assessment of periodontal healing distal to the mandibular second molar after coronectomy of the mandibular third molar: a prospective study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About