Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

  • Volume 41
  • /
  • Pages.4.1-4.10
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 2288-8101(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8586(eISSN)
Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Spontaneous bone regeneration after surgical extraction of a horizontally impacted mandibular third molar: a retrospective panoramic radiograph analysis

  • Kim, Eugene (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Eo, Mi Young (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Nguyen, Truc Thi Hoang (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yang, Hoon Joo (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Myoung, Hoon (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Soung Min (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2018.11.26
  • Accepted : 2018.12.20
  • Published : 2019.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The mandibular third molar (M3) is typically the last permanent tooth to erupt because of insufficient space and thick soft tissues covering its surface. Problems such as alveolar bone loss, development of a periodontal pocket, exposure of cementum, gingival recession, and dental caries can be found in the adjacent second molars (M2) following M3 extraction. The specific aims of the study were to assess the amount and rate of bone regeneration on the distal surface of M2 and to evaluate the aspects of bone regeneration in terms of varying degree of impaction. Methods: Four series of panoramic radiographic images were obtained from the selected cases, including images from the first visit, immediately after extraction, 6 weeks, and 6 months after extraction. ImageJ software® (NIH, USA) was used to measure linear distance from the region of interest to the distal root of the adjacent M2. Radiographic infrabony defect (RID) values were calculated from the measured radiographic bone height and cementoenamel junction with distortion compensation. Repeated measures of analysis of variance and one-way analysis of variance were conducted to analyze the statistical significant difference between RID and time, and a Spearman correlation test was conducted to assess the relationship between Pederson's difficulty index (DI) and RID. Results: A large RID (> 6 mm) can be reduced gradually and consistently over time. More than half of the samples recovered nearly to their normal healthy condition (RID ≤ 3 mm) by the 6-month follow-up. DI affected the first 6 weeks of post-extraction period and only showed a significant positive correlation with respect to the difference between baseline and final RID. Conclusions: Additional treatments on M2 for a minimum of 6 months after an M3 extraction could be recommended. Although DI may affect bone regeneration during the early healing period, further study is required to elucidate any possible factors associated with the healing process. The DI does not cause any long-term adverse effects on bone regeneration after surgical extraction.

Keywords

References

  1. Kruger GO (1984) Textbook of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 6th edition, Mosby, pp 174-175.
  2. Pell GJ, Gregory GT (1942) Report on a ten-year study of a tooth division technique for the removal of impacted teeth. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 28:B660-B666.
  3. Jung YH, Cho BH (2013) Prevalence of missing and impacted third molars in adults aged 25 years and above. Imaging Sci Dent 43:219-225. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2013.43.4.219
  4. Pederson GW (1988) Surgical removal of tooth. In: Pederson GW (ed) Oral surgery. WB Saunders, Philadelphia.
  5. Morris CR, Jerman AC (1971) Panoramic radiographic survey: a study of embedded third molars. J Oral Surg 29:122-125.
  6. Srivastava N, Shetty A, Goswami RD, Apparaju V, Bagga V, Kale S (2017) Incidence of distal caries in mandibular second molars due to impacted third molars: nonintervention strategy of asymptomatic third molars causes harm? A retrospective study. Int J Appl Bas Med Res 7:15-19.
  7. Claudia A, Barbu HM, Adi L, Gultekin A, Reiser V, Gultekin P, Mijiritsky E (2018) Relationship between third mandibular molar angulation and distal cervical caries in the second molar. J Craniofac Surg 29:2267-2271. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004505
  8. Lee HD, Hong KS, Chung CH, Lim SB (2006) A study on the periodontal status of second molar adjacent third molar. Kor J Periodontol 36:489-502. https://doi.org/10.5051/jkape.2006.36.2.489
  9. Peng K, Tseng Y, Shen E, Chiu SFE, Huang Y (2001) Mandibular second molar periodontal status after third molar extraction. J Periodontol 72:1647-1651. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.12.1647
  10. Kugelberg CF, Ahlstrom U, Ericson S, Hugoson A (1985) Periodontal healing after impacted lower third molar surgery. A retrospective study. Int J Oral Surg 14:29-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(85)80007-7
  11. Kugelberg CF, Ahlstrom U, Ericson S, Hugoson A (1986) Periodontal healing after impacted lower third molar surgery. Precision and accuracy of radiographic assessment of intrabony defects. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 15:675-686. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(86)80108-9
  12. Kugelberg CF (1990) Periodontal healing two and four years after impacted lower third molar surgery. A comparative retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 19:341-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(05)80077-3
  13. Faria AI, Gallas-Torreira M, Lopez-Raton M (2012) Mandibular second molar periodontal healing after impacted third molar extraction in young adults. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70:2732-2741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2012.07.044
  14. Shin HS, Kim HD (2015) Association between the number of existing permanent teeth and health-related quality of life (EuroQol-5 dimension) among adults: findings from the fifth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 2012. J Korean Acad Oral Health 39:303-310. https://doi.org/10.11149/jkaoh.2015.39.4.303
  15. No HJ, Cho SS (2016) Survey and statistical analysis using spss. Hak-hyun-sa, Seoul, pp 165-245.
  16. Park YK (2010) SPSS data analysis for social welfare. Shinjeong, Seoul, pp 234-254.
  17. Marmary Y, Brayer L, Tzukert A, Feller L (1986) Alveolar bone repair following extraction of impacted mandibular third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 61:324-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(86)90409-3
  18. Krausz AA, Machtei EE, Peled M (2005) Effects of lower third molar extraction on attachment position and alveolar bone height of the adjacent second molar. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 34:756-760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2005.02.006
  19. Kugelberg CF, Ahlstrom U, Ericson S, Hugoson A, Kvint S (1991) Periodontal healing after impacted lower third molar surgery in adolescents and adults. A prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 20:18-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(05)80689-7
  20. Kan KW, Liu JK, Lo EC (2002) Residual periodontal defects distal to the mandibular second molar 6-36 months after impacted third molar extraction. J Clin Periodontol 29:1004. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.2002.291105.x
  21. Sanderink GC, Visser WN, Kramers EW (1991) The origin of a case of severe image distortion in rotational panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 20:169-171. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20.3.1808003
  22. Choi YG, Kim YK, Eckert SE, Shim CH (2004) Cross-sectional study of the factors that influence radiographic magnification of implant diameter and length. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19:594-596.
  23. Samawi SS, Burke PH (1984) Angular distortion in the orthopantomogram. Br J Orthod 11:100-107. https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.11.2.100
  24. Devlin H, Yuan J (2013) Object position and image magnification in dental panoramic radiography: a theoretical analysis. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 42:29951683. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/29951683
  25. Shahidi S, Zamiri B, Abolvardi M, Akhlaghian M, Paknahad M (2018) Comparison of dental panoramic radiography and CBCT for measuring vertical bone height in different horizontal locations of posterior mandibular alveolar process. J Dent 19:83-91.
  26. Inocencio Faria A, Gallas-Torreira M, Lopez-Raton M, Crespo-Vazquez E, Rodriguez-Nunez I, Lopez-Castro G (2013) Radiological infrabony defects after impacted mandibular third molar extractions in young adults. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 71:2020-2028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2013.07.029
  27. Araujo M, Lindhe J (2005) Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 32:212-218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00642.x
  28. Cardaropoli G, Araujo M, Lindhe J (2003) Dynamics of bone tissue formation in tooth extraction sites. J Clin Periodontol 30:809-818. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.2003.00366.x
  29. Montero J, Mazzaglia G (2011) Effect of removing an impacted mandibular third molar on the periodontal status of the mandibular second molar. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:2691-2697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2011.06.205
  30. Susarla SM, Dodson TB (2004) Risk factors for third molar extraction difficulty. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 62:1363-1371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2004.05.214

Cited by

  1. Effects of Impacted Lower Third Molar Extraction on Periodontal Tissue of the Adjacent Second Molar vol.17, 2019, https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s298147