Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 17, 2025
04:19
The Establishment of a Murine Mandibular Molar Extraction Socket Healing Model
Published on: January 13, 2023
3.9K
Second molar eruption disturbances in borderline extraction orthodontic patients
Thomas Patrick1, Kylie Stickrath1, John Christensen2
1Department of Orthodontics, Adams School of Dentistry, Chapel Hill, NC.
Summary
For borderline crowding, extraction treatment reduces second molar eruption disturbances. Nonextraction treatment does not increase risks compared to mild crowding, but evaluating impaction risks is crucial.
Area of Science:
- Orthodontics
- Dental Arch Development
- Molar Eruption Dynamics
Background:
- Nonextraction orthodontic treatment is linked to increased third molar impactions.
- Limited data exists on second molar eruption disturbances in relation to orthodontic crowding treatment.
- This study addresses the gap by comparing second molar eruption outcomes with and without extractions for crowding.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the prevalence of second molar eruption disturbances in relation to orthodontic treatment strategies for maxillary and mandibular crowding.
- To determine if extraction or nonextraction approaches influence the likelihood of second molar impaction.
- To identify risk factors for second molar impaction in orthodontic patients.
Main Methods:
- Evaluated 535 dental arches from 346 patients (aged 10-15) with unerupted second molars.
- Grouped patients by crowding severity (mild, borderline) and treatment (extraction, nonextraction).
- Assessed second molar eruption disturbances and impaction risk indicators using radiographic and clinical records; Fisher exact test applied.
Main Results:
- Borderline crowding patients undergoing nonextraction had significantly higher rates of maxillary (20.0%) and mandibular (27.6%) second molar eruption disturbances compared to extraction patients (5.2% and 7.1%, respectively).
- No significant difference in eruption disturbances was found between mild crowding (nonextraction) and borderline crowding (nonextraction).
- Maxillary impactions were associated with apical molar position; mandibular impactions with mesial angulation or lack of space.
Conclusions:
- Extraction treatment in borderline crowding cases reduces the risk of second molar eruption disturbances.
- Nonextraction treatment for borderline crowding does not elevate risk compared to mild crowding scenarios.
- Pretreatment assessment of second molar impaction risk indicators is recommended when considering extraction for crowding.
Related Concept Videos
01:15Teeth
366
The formation of teeth, also known as odontogenesis, is a complex process that begins in utero, around the sixth week of embryonic development. There are three stages to this process: the bud stage, the cap stage, and the bell stage.
In the bud stage, the tooth germ (an aggregation of cells) starts to form in the developing jawbone. During the cap stage, the tooth germ differentiates into enamel organ, dental papilla, and dental sac, which will later develop into the tooth's enamel, dentin...
In the bud stage, the tooth germ (an aggregation of cells) starts to form in the developing jawbone. During the cap stage, the tooth germ differentiates into enamel organ, dental papilla, and dental sac, which will later develop into the tooth's enamel, dentin...
366
01:26Tonsillitis II: Management
105
This lesson will focus on the different treatment options for managing tonsillitis, which typically depend on the cause and severity.
105