Impaction and Retention of Second Molars: Diagnosis, Treatment and Outcome

Magnusson, Cathrine; Kjellberg, Heidrun

doi:10.2319/0003-3219(2009)079[0422:iarosm]2.0.co;2

Cited by 48 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings suggest that this intervention significantly increases the chance of impaction of mandibular second molars compared with the reported prevalence of impacted second molars in the general population, which ranged from 0.2% to 2.3%. [8][9][10][11][12] Although we considered several variables, including facial pattern, skeletal relationship, spacing, and presence of third molars, as possibly contributing to impaction of the mandibular second molar, only the pretreatment intermolar angle was found to be a significant predictor of impaction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although Brin et al 28 found no association between skeletal relationship and the eruptive position of the second molar, Behbehani et al 15 suggested that vertical condylar growth resulting in autorotation of the mandible contributes to a smaller gonial angle, leading to increased risk of third molar impaction. 28 Magnusson and Kjellberg 12 reported on a patient series in which 166 second molars were impacted. Seventy-eight teeth were associated with the presence of third molars, although it is not reported which arch was affected, or if there was any statistically significant relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 Several studies report that the prevalence of impacted second molars in the general population ranges from 0.2% to 2.3%. [8][9][10][11][12] Studies examining the impact of available space for mandibular third molar eruption have revealed a direct relationship between available space and likelihood of impaction. [13][14][15][16] The study of Å rtun et al 14 reported that maxillary third molar impaction could be predicted according to the size of the retromolar space and the amount of mesial molar movement that occurred following premolar extraction therapy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

E-space preservation

Sonis¹,

Ackerman²

2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine the relationship of E-space preservation with lingual holding arches to mandibular permanent second molar impaction. Methods: Two hundred consecutively treated patients undergoing nonextraction treatment for incisor crowding were entered into the study. Lower incisor crowding was assessed by the Little Irregularity Index. Treatment involved E-space preservation via a passive lingual arch placed prior to exfoliation of the second primary molar. Panoramic and cephalometric radiographs were analyzed for any significant relationship of mandibular permanent second molar impaction relative to molar angulation, spacing, growth pattern, and skeletal relationships. Results: Twenty-nine patients had at least one impacted second molar (14.5%). Of a possible 400 mandibular second molars, 34 were determined to be impacted (8.5%). Only the mandibular first molar-second molar angulation was found to be significant (P , .001). Pretreatment intermolar angulation of 24 degrees had a positive predictive value of 1. Conclusion: Impaction of permanent second mandibular molars in patients undergoing nonextraction via E-space preservation with a passive lingual arch is 10 to 20 times more prevalent than that observed in the general population. Risk of impaction is best predicted by the pretreatment intermolar angulation between first and second permanent mandibular molars. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:1045-1049

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

E-space preservation

Sonis¹,

Ackerman²

2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…introdUcción La no erupción del segundo molar mandibular permanente es una condición relativamente baja, pero ha ido en aumento en los últimos años 1,2,3,4,5 . La Dra.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Variables como la distancia desde distal del primer molar al borde anterior de la rama mandibular, tamaño del ángulo formado entre el eje axial del segundo molar con el plano mandibular 2 . También se ha relacionado la no erupción del segundo molar con sexo, edad, presencia de terceros molares, pérdidas prematuras de dientes temporales, uso de aparatos para ganar espacio en el sector anterior 1,3,4,5 . La retención de segundos se relaciona también con tratamientos más largo, costosos y complejos 6,7,8,9 , por lo cual es de suma importancia enfocarse en el diagnóstico precoz 10 y tratamiento temprano.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

No erupción de segundos molares mandibulares permanentes en radiografía panorámica.

Bizcar

Navarro

Sandoval

2017

Rev. Clin. Periodoncia Implantol. Rehabil. Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ectopic maxillary third molar in Early PleistoceneHomo antecessorfrom Atapuerca‐Gran Dolina site (Burgos, Spain)

Martín‐Francés

Martinón‐Torres

Pinillos

et al. 2020

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Here we describe the case of an ectopic maxillary third molar (M3), preventing the eruption of the M2, in the individual H3 of the hominin hypodigm of level TD6.2 of the Early Pleistocene site of Gran Dolina (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain). Materials and Methods The fossil remains from the TD6.2 level of the Gran Dolina site (about 170 specimens) are assigned to Homo antecessor. Different geochronological methods place these hominins in the oxygen isotopic stage 21, between 0.8 and 0.85 million years ago (Ma). The immature individual H3 is represented by an almost complete midface (ATD6‐69), preserving various teeth in situ. We used high‐resolution microtomograhy (mCT) to investigate the abnormal position of the left M3, virtually reconstruct M2, and M3 as well as assessing the development stage of these. Finally, we compare this case with extinct and extant populations. Results Based on the identified signs, we suggest that individual H3 suffered from a unilateral impaction of the M2 as a result of the ectopic position of the developing M3. Discussion We conclude that the most likely etiology for the ectopic position of the M3 is the lack of space in the maxilla. We discuss possible contributing factors, such as morphometric aspects of the maxilla and the early mineralization of the M3, to support the M2 impaction. Finally, due to the early age at death of this individual we did not identify any secondary lesion associated with the M2 impaction.

show abstract

Impaction and Retention of Second Molars: Diagnosis, Treatment and Outcome

Abstract: In more than half of the treated patients the second molars failed to erupt into a proper position. The most common treatment given (extraction of the second molar) was the least successful.

Cited by 48 publications

References 0 publications

E-space preservation

E-space preservation

No erupción de segundos molares mandibulares permanentes en radiografía panorámica.

Ectopic maxillary third molar in Early PleistoceneHomo antecessorfrom Atapuerca‐Gran Dolina site (Burgos, Spain)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About