Cargando…

Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above

BACKGROUND: The prophylactic extraction of asymptomatic impacted mandibular third molar is a contentious issue in dental practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate symptomatic impacted mandibular third molars in patients 50 years and above, and determine the burden of the impaction on the adjacent second mola...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anyanechi, Charles E, Saheeb, Birch D, Okechi, Uchenna C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Makerere Medical School 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6531985/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31149009
http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v19i1.55
_version_ 1783420922992001024
author Anyanechi, Charles E
Saheeb, Birch D
Okechi, Uchenna C
author_facet Anyanechi, Charles E
Saheeb, Birch D
Okechi, Uchenna C
author_sort Anyanechi, Charles E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The prophylactic extraction of asymptomatic impacted mandibular third molar is a contentious issue in dental practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate symptomatic impacted mandibular third molars in patients 50 years and above, and determine the burden of the impaction on the adjacent second molar. METHODS: This was a prospective clinical study over a three-year period. The diagnosis of impacted mandibular third molar and their associated pathology was made by clinical and radiological examination. The data obtained were age, sex, type of impaction, reason for surgical extraction, and the clinical condition of the adjacent second molar. RESULTS: Patients 50 years and above were 33.4%, and those with impaction 22.8%, while the symptomatic cases were in 18.4% patients. The age of the patients ranged from 52 to 84 years with male: female ratio, 2.3:1. In all the asymptomatic impactions, the adjacent second molars were disease-free, whereas 73.6% of the adjacent second molar related to symptomatic cases were asymptomatic (P=0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that 15.9% of impactions in 18.4% of patients were symptomatic and required surgical extraction, whereas the burden of impaction on the adjacent second molar was 26.4%, and these required only preventive and restorative treatments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6531985
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Makerere Medical School
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65319852019-05-30 Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above Anyanechi, Charles E Saheeb, Birch D Okechi, Uchenna C Afr Health Sci Articles BACKGROUND: The prophylactic extraction of asymptomatic impacted mandibular third molar is a contentious issue in dental practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate symptomatic impacted mandibular third molars in patients 50 years and above, and determine the burden of the impaction on the adjacent second molar. METHODS: This was a prospective clinical study over a three-year period. The diagnosis of impacted mandibular third molar and their associated pathology was made by clinical and radiological examination. The data obtained were age, sex, type of impaction, reason for surgical extraction, and the clinical condition of the adjacent second molar. RESULTS: Patients 50 years and above were 33.4%, and those with impaction 22.8%, while the symptomatic cases were in 18.4% patients. The age of the patients ranged from 52 to 84 years with male: female ratio, 2.3:1. In all the asymptomatic impactions, the adjacent second molars were disease-free, whereas 73.6% of the adjacent second molar related to symptomatic cases were asymptomatic (P=0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that 15.9% of impactions in 18.4% of patients were symptomatic and required surgical extraction, whereas the burden of impaction on the adjacent second molar was 26.4%, and these required only preventive and restorative treatments. Makerere Medical School 2019-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6531985/ /pubmed/31149009 http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v19i1.55 Text en © 2019 Anyanechi et al. Licensee African Health Sciences. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Articles
Anyanechi, Charles E
Saheeb, Birch D
Okechi, Uchenna C
Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above
title Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above
title_full Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above
title_fullStr Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above
title_full_unstemmed Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above
title_short Is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? A prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above
title_sort is prophylactic removal of impacted mandibular third molar justified in all patients? a prospective clinical study of patients 50 years and above
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6531985/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31149009
http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v19i1.55
work_keys_str_mv AT anyanechicharlese isprophylacticremovalofimpactedmandibularthirdmolarjustifiedinallpatientsaprospectiveclinicalstudyofpatients50yearsandabove
AT saheebbirchd isprophylacticremovalofimpactedmandibularthirdmolarjustifiedinallpatientsaprospectiveclinicalstudyofpatients50yearsandabove
AT okechiuchennac isprophylacticremovalofimpactedmandibularthirdmolarjustifiedinallpatientsaprospectiveclinicalstudyofpatients50yearsandabove