The mesioangular third molar – to extract or not to extract? Analysis of 776 consecutive third molars

Influence of Non‐Impacted Third Molars on Pathologies of Adjacent Second Molars: A Retrospective Study

“…Although the study population here is not representative of the population at large, results of the present study suggest that presence of N‐M3s, even if they are asymptomatic, represents an important risk factor for periodontal health of A‐M2s. Other factors that might influence results are oral health conditions, food impaction, and smoking, which were not accounted for in data analysis 6 , 33 . Importantly, OPGs, as 2D x‐ray images, present limitations in assessing rotation of M3s, although they are generally sufficient to evaluate whether M3s are completely erupted and reach the occlusal plane.…”

Prevalence of missing and impacted third molars in adults aged 25 years and above

“…Allen et al25 pointed out that disease or potential disease in the adjacent second molar teeth passed unnoticed in the NICE guidelines for surgical extraction of third molars. Mesioangular and horizontal mandibular third molars have been found to have a high risk of caries development and periodontal tissue damage at the second molar 26.…”

“…Periodontal bone loss was more frequent than caries in the second molars adjacent to mesioangular third molars, and the prevalence of alveolar bone loss was relatively high in second molars adjacent to horizontal or inverted mandibular third molars. With careful monitoring, the development of lesions in adjacent second molars may be detected early, and a mesioangular or horizontal third molar associated with caries of the second molar should be removed and a restoration should be placed on the adjacent second molar 25. Oral hygiene instruction and preventive advice should be emphasized to patients with mesioangularly or horizontally impacted third molars.…”

What Has Been the United Kingdom's Experience With Retention of Third Molars?

“…39 More recently, the incidence was 19%. 40 However, we can report that in our study cohort of 2009, 30% of patients had caries as an indication for M3 surgery, although the coding does not differentiate between caries of the M3 or M2, making analysis difficult. A specific code is required for M2 caries in accordance with the NICE guidelines.…”

“…Thus, a significant decrease occurred in activity before the NICE guidelines, possibly in response to the Royal College of Surgeons guidelines in 1997. 14 Some rebound in M3 surgery activity occurred in 1997 to 1998; however, a second phase of decline began lowering the activity to 40 Data on M3 surgery activity were obtained from private settings-data from the 2 leading health insurance providers, contributing to 75% of overall privately insured activity, which are generally provided in hospitals. For provider 1, the M3 surgery activity was at 4,000 to 5,000 patient episodes in 1995, decreasing to 2,000 in 2010.…”