Bone crestal height and bone density after third-molar extraction and grafting: a long-term follow-up study

The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term influence of xenogenic grafts on bone crestal height and radiographic density following extraction of teeth. The right and left third lower molars of 22 patients were surgically extracted, and one randomly chosen socket was filled with a xenogenic graft (Gent-Tech). The contralateral molar was left to heal naturally, serving as a paired control. Digital intraoral radiographies were taken at surgery and 2, 6, and 24 months after, to evaluate bone density (BD) and alveolar bone crest to cementoenamel junction distance. The data obtained were subjected to two-way analysis of variance and Tukey`s test (alpha = 0.05). The significant decrease in cementoenamel junction distance observed for both groups was limited to the first 6 months. BD values increased significantly in the first 6 months, with no alterations observed up to 24 months for both groups. BD was higher for the experimental group at all time points (p < 0.05). Socket grafting with the xenogenic materials tested did not changed bone crestal height and bone radiographic density in the long term.

Strategic maxillary second-molar extraction in Class II malocclusion

Maxillary second-molar extraction in Class II malocclusion is a controversial issue in orthodontics. This treatment protocol is rigorous and not routine. In this case report, we present the orthodontic treatment of a patient with a Class II malocclusion, maxillary crowding, and no mandibular first molars, treated with extraction of the maxillary second molars. The mechanotherapy and indications of maxillary second- molar extraction are discussed. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:878-86)

Comparison of oral versus sublingual piroxicam during postoperative pain management after lower third molar extraction

In this study, 53 patients received piroxicam, administered orally or sublingually, after undergoing removal of symmetrically positioned lower third molars, during two separate appointments. This study used a randomized, blind, cross-over protocol. Objective and subjective parameters were recorded for comparison of postoperative results for 7 days after surgery. Patients treated with oral or sublingual piroxicam reported low postoperative pain scores. The patients who received piroxicam orally took a similar average amount of analgesic rescue medication compared with patients who received piroxicam sublingually (p > 0.05). Patients exhibited similar values for mouth opening measured just before surgery and immediately following suture removal 7 days later (p > 0.05), and showed no significant differences between routes of piroxicam administration for swelling control during the second or seventh postoperative days (p > 0.05). In summary, pain, trismus and swelling after lower third molar extraction, independent of surgical difficulty, could be controlled by piroxicam 20 mg administered orally or sublingually and no significant differences were observed between the route of delivery used in this study.

Sharp mandibular bone irregularities after lower third molar extraction: Incidence, clinical features and risk factors

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence and clinical symptoms associated with sharp mandibular bone irregularities (SMBI) after lower third molar extraction and to identify possible risk factors for this complication. Study Design: A mixed study design was used. A retrospective cohort study of 1432 lower third molar extractions was done to determine the incidence of SMBI and a retrospective case-control study was done to determine potential demographic and etiologic factors by comparing those patients with postoperative SMBI with controls. Results: Twelve SMBI were found (0.84%). Age was the most important risk factor for this complication. The operated side and the presence of an associated radiolucent image were also significantly related to the development of mandibular bone irregularities. The depth of impaction of the tooth might also be an important factor since erupted or nearly erupted third molars were more frequent in the SMBI group. Conclusions: SMBI are a rare postoperative complication after lower third molar removal. Older patients having left side lower third molars removed are more likely to develop this problem. The treatment should be the removal of the irregularity when the patient is symptomatic

Ridge preservation at implants installed immediately after molar extraction. An experimental study in the dog

Aim: To evaluate the influence of deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM), in conjunction with a collagen membrane, on bone resorption at implants installed in a lingual position immediately into extraction sockets with horizontal residual buccal defects >2.0 mm. Material & methods: The pulp tissue of the mesial roots of 1M1 was removed in six Labrador dogs, and the root canals were filled with gutta-percha and cement. Flaps were elevated. The molars were hemi-sectioned and the distal roots removed. Implants were installed in a lingual position and with the shoulder flush with the buccal bony crest. After installation, defects of about 2.5 and 2.7 mm in width resulted at the buccal aspects of the test and control sites, respectively. Only in the left site (test), deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) particles were placed into the defect concomitantly with the placement of a collagen membrane. On the control sites, no biomaterials were applied. A non-submerged healing was allowed. Results: After 3 months of healing, one control implant was not integrated and was excluded from the analysis, together with the contralateral test implant. All remaining implants were integrated into mature bone. The buccal alveolar bony crest was resorbed more at the test compared with the control sites, 2.2 ± 0.9 mm and 1.5 ± 1.3 mm, respectively. The vertical resorption of the lingual plate was 1.6 ± 1.5 mm and 1.5 ± 1.1 mm at the test and control sites, respectively. Only small residual DBBM particles were found at the test sites (1.4%). Conclusion: The use of DBBM particles to fill buccal defects of ≥2.5 mm at implants installed immediately into alveolar extraction sockets did not preserve the buccal bony wall. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for third molar extraction in healthy patients: current scientific evidence

Third molar extraction is one of the most frequently performed procedures in the dental clinic, and it is associated with innumerable trans- and postoperative complications, such as pain, trismus, edema, localized alveolar osteitis, and surgical site infection. Some authors advocate the use of local or systemic antibiotics to reduce the incidence of these postoperative complications. However, several studies have revealed an insignificant gain after using antibiotics. Despite the risks of allergic reactions, toxicity, and the development of resistant microorganisms, about 50% of dentists routinely prescribe the use of prophylactic antibiotics for this purpose. The goal of this paper is to evaluate the scientific evidence that justifies antibiotic prescription to healthy patients undergoing third molar extraction.

Immediate transmucosal implant placement in molar extraction sites: a 12-month prospective multicenter cohort study

AIM: To assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes of immediate transmucosal placement of implants into molar extraction sockets. STUDY DESIGN: Twelve-month multicenter prospective cohort study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Following molar extraction, tapered implants with an endosseous diameter of 4.8 mm and a shoulder diameter of 6.5 mm were immediately placed into the sockets. Molars with evidence of acute periapical pathology were excluded. After implant placement and achievement of primary stability, flaps were repositioned and sutured allowing a non-submerged, transmucosal healing. Peri-implant marginal defects were treated according to the principles of guided bone regeneration (GBR) by means of deproteinized bovine bone mineral particles in conjunction with a bioresrobable collagen membrane. Standardized radiographs were obtained at baseline and 12 months thereafter. Changes in depth and width of the distance from the implant shoulder (IS) and from the alveolar crest (AC) to the bottom of the defect (BD) were assessed. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients (42 males and 40 females) were enrolled and followed for 12 months. They contributed with 82 tapered implants. Extraction sites displayed sufficient residual bone volume to allow primary stability of all implants. Sixty-four percent of the implants were placed in the areas of 36 and 46. GBR was used in conjunction with the placement of all implants. No post-surgical complications were observed. All implants healed uneventfully yielding a survival rate of 100% and healthy soft tissue conditions after 12 months. Radiographically, statistically significant changes (P<0.0001) in mesial and distal crestal bone levels were observed from baseline to the 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this 12-month prospective cohort study showed that immediate transmucosal implant placement represented a predictable treatment option for the replacement of mandibular and maxillary molars lost due to reasons other than periodontitis including vertical root fractures, endodontic failures and caries.

Dimensional ridge alterations following immediate implant placement in molar extraction sites: a six-month prospective cohort study with surgical re-entry

AIM: To assess dimensional ridge alterations following immediate implant placement in molar extraction sites. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twelve subjects received 12 immediate transmucosal implants in molar extraction sites. Peri-implant defects were treated according to the principles of Guided Bone Regeneration by means of a deproteinized bone substitute and a bioresorbable collagen membrane. Changes in vertical (IS-BD, CREST-BD) and horizontal distances (EC-I, IC-I) of alveolar bony walls to the bottom of the defects (BD) and to the implant surfaces (I) were compared between implant placement and surgical re-entry at 6 months. RESULTS: The implant survival rate at 6 months was 100%. Statistically significant differences (P<0.01) were observed in the mean changes in vertical distances IS-BD and CREST-BD between baseline and re-entry. At re-entry, all peri-implant marginal defects assessed from the internal socket wall to the implant surface (IC-I) were healed. The residual combined thickness of the buccal wall with the newly formed peri-implant bone at sites with an initial thickness of 1 mm was statistically significantly smaller (P<0.05) compared with that of sites with an initial buccal thickness of 2 mm (2.50 +/- 0.76 vs. 4+/-0 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The marginal defects around immediate implants placed in molar extraction sites were completely filled after 6 months of healing through de novo bone formation. Bone resorption was observed from the external aspects of the buccal and oral socket walls. Dimensional changes of the external socket walls were mostly pronounced at the buccal aspects.

Soft tissues healing at immediate transmucosal implants placed into molar extraction sites with buccal self-contained dehiscences. A 12-month controlled clinical trial

AIM: To assess soft tissues healing at immediate transmucosal implants placed into molar extraction sites with buccal self-contained dehiscences. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For this 12-month controlled clinical trial, 15 subjects received immediate transmucosal tapered-effect (TE) implants placed in molar extraction sockets displaying a buccal bone dehiscence (test sites) with a height and a width of > or =3 mm, respectively. Peri-implant marginal defects were treated according to the principles of Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) by means of deproteinized bovine bone mineral particles in conjunction with a bioresorbable collagen membrane. Fifteen subjects received implants in healed molar sites (control sites) with intact buccal alveolar walls following tooth extraction. In total, 30 TE implants with an endosseous diameter of 4.8 mm and a shoulder diameter of 6.5 mm were used. Flaps were repositioned and sutured, allowing non-submerged, transmucosal soft tissues healing. At the 12-month follow-up, pocket probing depths (PPD) and clinical attachment levels (CAL) were compared between implants placed in the test and the control sites, respectively. RESULTS: All subjects completed the 12-month follow-up period. All implants healed uneventfully, yielding a survival rate of 100%. After 12 months, statistically significantly higher (P<0.05) PPD and CAL values were recorded around implants placed in the test sites compared with those placed in the control sites. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this controlled clinical trial showed that healing following immediate transmucosal implant installation in molar extraction sites with wide and shallow buccal dehiscences yielded less favorable outcomes compared with those of implants placed in healed sites, and resulted in lack of 'complete' osseointegration.

Influence of unilateral maxillary first molar extraction treatment on second and third molar inclination in Class II subdivision patients.

OBJECTIVE To assess the maxillary second molar (M2) and third molar (M3) inclination following orthodontic treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusion with unilateral maxillary first molar (M1) extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS Panoramic radiographs of 21 Class II subdivision adolescents (eight boys, 13 girls; mean age, 12.8 years; standard deviation, 1.7 years) before treatment, after treatment with extraction of one maxillary first molar and Begg appliances and after at least 1.8 years in retention were retrospectively collected from a private practice. M2 and M3 inclination angles (M2/ITP, M2/IOP, M3/ITP, M3/IOP), constructed by intertuberosity (ITP) and interorbital planes (IOP), were calculated for the extracted and nonextracted segments. Random effects regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the molar angulation of extraction, time, and gender after adjusting for baseline measurements. RESULTS Time and extraction status were significant predictors for M2 angulation. M2/ITP and M2/IOP decreased by 4.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.93, 1.16; P  =  .001) and 3.67 (95% CI: -6.76, -0.58; P  =  .020) in the extraction group compared to the nonextraction group after adjusting for time and gender. The adjusted analysis showed that extraction was the only predictor for M3 angulation that reached statistical significance. M3 mesial inclination increased by 7.38° (95% CI: -11.2, -3.54; P < .001) and 7.33° (95% CI: -11.48, -3.19; P  =  .001). CONCLUSIONS M2 and M3 uprighting significantly improved in the extraction side after orthodontic treatment with unilateral maxillary M1 extraction. There was a significant increase in mesial tipping of maxillary second molar crowns over time.

Long-term evaluation of Class II subdivision treatment with unilateral maxillary first molar extraction

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the long-term effects of asymmetrical maxillary first molar (M1) extraction in Class II subdivision treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS Records of 20 Class II subdivision whites (7 boys, 13 girls; mean age, 13.0 years; SD, 1.7 years) consecutively treated with the Begg technique and M1 extraction, and 15 untreated asymmetrical Class II adolescents (4 boys, 11 girls; mean age, 12.2 years; SD, 1.3 years) were examined in this study. Cephalometric analysis and PAR assessment were carried out before treatment (T1), after treatment (T2), and on average 2.5 years posttreatment (T3) for the treatment group, and at similar time points and average follow-up of 1.8 years for the controls. RESULTS The adjusted analysis indicated that the maxillary incisors were 2.3 mm more retracted in relation to A-Pog between T1 and T3 (β  =  2.31; 95% CI; 0.76, 3.87), whereas the mandibular incisors were 1.3 mm more protracted (β  =  1.34; 95% CI; 0.09, 2.59), and 5.9° more proclined to the mandibular plane (β  =  5.92; 95% CI; 1.43, 10.41) compared with controls. The lower lip appeared 1.4 mm more protrusive relative to the subnasale-soft tissue-Pog line throughout the observation period in the treated adolescents (β  =  1.43; 95% CI; 0.18, 2.67). There was a significant PAR score reduction over the entire follow-up period in the molar extraction group (β  =  -6.73; 95% CI; -10.7, -2.7). At T2, 65% of the subjects had maxillary midlines perfectly aligned with the face. CONCLUSIONS Unilateral M1 extraction in asymmetrical Class II cases may lead to favorable occlusal outcomes in the long term without harming the midline esthetics and soft tissue profile.

Comparison between local anaesthetic agents, lidocaine and bupivacaine, in patients undergoing third molar extraction in terms of patient satisfaction.

AIMS: (1) To determine if anaesthetic agent bupivacaine, has a prolonged effect on the period of acute postoperative pain when compared to lidocaine, a shorter acting agent. (2) To determine patient’s post-operative satisfaction and preference with regard to anaesthetic choice. METHODS: This double blind, randomised, interventional clinical trial included 85 patients. All patients had bilateral impacted lower third molars of removed under general anaesthetic. All patients received 0.5% plain bupivacaine on one randomly allocated side, with 2% lidocaine (with adrenaline) administered on the opposite side. Pain was measured using visual analogue scales at 0, 30, 60 minutes and 3, 4, 6 and 8 hours post-surgery. Pain was analysed for 1 week following surgery. Psychological evaluations and patient reported outcomes, including patient satisfaction were evaluated. RESULTS: A significant difference in pain (P=0.001) was seen during the 3-8 hour post-operative period. The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval was 10.0 or above at 3hours and 4 hours post-surgery. Two-thirds of patients preferred bupivacaine. CONCLUSION: Longer lasting anaesthetics such as bupivacaine offer a longer period of analgesia, and improve overall patient satisfaction.

Electromyographic Study of the Masseter Muscle after Lower Third Molar Surgery

Third molar extraction surgery is one of the most frequently performed procedures in the areas of buccal-maxillofacial traumatology and surgery. The post-surgery evolution was evaluated based on the clinical evidence obtained so far. The objective of this study was to analyze the post-surgery clinical evolution of the masseter muscle by means of surface electromyography, to evaluate muscle activity. Four analyses were performed: one pre-surgery, to register the normal activity, and three in post-surgery: on the 7(th), 14(th) and 21(st) postoperative days, in a sample of 30 patients. On the 21(st) day, there was near normal recovery of the electrical signal of the masseter in women, but in men this activity did not reach normal levels. Surface electromyography is a safe and reliable tool for post-surgery evolution control of masseter function.

Evaluation of the indication for surgical extraction of third molars according to the oral surgeon and the primary care dentist. Experience in the Master of Oral Surgery and Implantology at Barcelona University Dental School

Introduction: Third molar extraction is the most frequent procedure in oral surgery. The present study evaluates the indication of third molar extraction as established by the primary care dentist (PCD) and the oral surgeon, and compares the justification for extraction with the principal reason for patient consultation. Patients and method: A descriptive study was made of 319 patients subjected to surgical removal of a third molar in the context of the Master of Oral Surgery and Implantology (Barcelona University Dental School, Barcelona, Spain) between July 2004 and March 2005. The following parameters were evaluated: sex, age, molar, type of impaction, position according to the classifications of Pell and Gregory and of Winter, and the reasons justifying extraction. Results: The lower third molars were the most commonly extracted molars (73.7%). A total of 69.6% of the teeth were covered by soft tissues only. Fifty-six percent of the lower molars corresponded to Pell and Gregory Class IIB, while 42.1% were in the vertical position. The most common reason for patient reference to our Service of Oral Surgery on the part of the PCD was prophylactic removal (51.0% versus 46.1% in the case of the oral surgeon). Discussion and conclusions. Our results show prophylaxis to be the principal indication of third molar extraction, followed by orthodontic reasons. Regarding third molars with associated clinical symptoms or signs, infectious disease-including pericoronitis- was the pathology most often observed by the oral surgeon, followed by caries. This order of frequency was seen to invert in the case of third molars referred for extraction by the PCD. A vertical position predominated among the third molars with associated pathology