Saving the 2nd Molar from the 3rd Is it Really the Guilt of the Tilt?
Introduction: Clinicians often relate the distal caries in second molars to angulated third molars, which if left undetected can lead to gross decay that may further require removal of the tooth. Due to this fact, many third molars are advised for prophylactic removal to prevent decay in the sec...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
JCDR Research and Publications Private Limited
2016-05-01
|
Series: | Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://jcdr.net/articles/PDF/7727/13555_CE[Ra1]_F(GH)_PF1(EkGH)_PFA(NC_AK)_PF2(PAG).pdf |
Summary: | Introduction: Clinicians often relate the distal caries in second
molars to angulated third molars, which if left undetected can
lead to gross decay that may further require removal of the tooth.
Due to this fact, many third molars are advised for prophylactic
removal to prevent decay in the second molar. But this approach
would only be justified when the incidence of decay/loss of
second molar due to third molar are reasonably high. We sought
to determine incidence of caries experience and also sequel
extraction in second molars associated with the third molars.
Aim: The study was conducted to answer the basic question
that whether the incidence of caries and subsequent extraction
of second molar due to angulated third molars is high enough to
justify the prophylactic removal of third molar or not.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted on radiographic records of 1187 patients. The effect of tilted third
molar on the second molar was measured in relation with three
parameters namely level & position of third molar with respect
to second molar and the distribution among arches.
Results: The results indicated that out of total number of teeth
examined only 5.4% of maxillary and 9.6% of mandibular
second molars were affected by tilted third molars. Further, only
2.2% of mandibular and 2.9% of maxillary second molars were
indicated for extraction. The data was statistically insignificant.
Conclusion: It was concluded that distal caries in second
molars is not very common. It may be present in some cases
of third molar impactions and prophylactic removal of these
impacted teeth may not be considered appropriate. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2249-782X 0973-709X |