Removal of nonimpacted third molars alters the periodontal condition of their neighbors clinically, immunologically, and microbiologically

Considering the adverse effects of nonimpacted third molars (N-M3s) on the periodontal health of adjacent second molars (M2s), the removal of N-M3s may be beneficial to the periodontal health of their neighbors. This study aimed to investigate the clinical, immunological, and microbiological changes of the periodontal condition around M2s following removal of neighboring N-M3s across a 6-month period. Subjects with at least one quadrant containing an intact first molar (M1), M2, and N-M3 were screened and those who met the inclusion criteria and decided to receive N-M3 extraction were recruited in the following investigation. M2 periodontal condition was interrogated before M3 extraction (baseline) and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Improvements in clinical periodontal indexes of M2s in response to their adjacent N-M3 removal, along with changes in inflammatory biomarkers among gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) and the composition of subgingival plaque collected from the distal sites of the M2s of the targeted quadrant were parallelly analyzed. Complete data of 26 tooth extraction patients across the follow-up period were successfully obtained and subsequently applied for statistical analysis. Compared to the baseline, the periodontal condition of M2s was significantly changed 6 months after N-M3 removal; specifically, the probing depth of M2s significantly reduced (P < 0.001), the matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-8 concentration involved in GCF significantly decreased (P = 0.025), and the abundance of the pathogenic genera unidentified Prevotellaceae and Streptococcus significantly decreased (P < 0.001 and P = 0.009, respectively). We concluded that N-M3 removal was associated with superior clinical indexes, decreased GCF inflammatory biomarkers, and reduced pathogenic microbiome distribution within the subgingival plaque. Although the retention or removal of N-M3s continues to be controversial, our findings provide additional evidence that medical decisions should be made as early as possible or at least before the neighboring teeth are irretrievably damaged.