Methods of space maintenance for premature loss of a primary molar: a review

Aim: This critical appraisal attempts to answer the question: What is the best method of space maintenance (SM) following premature loss of a primary molar in children under 12 years old? Methods: A search to identify studies relevant to the PICO was conducted. Single case reports and studies prior...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ahmad, A.J (Author), Ashley, P.F (Author), Parekh, S. (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Springer Verlag 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 02489nam a2200397Ia 4500
001 10.1007-s40368-018-0357-5
008 220706s2018 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 18186300 (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a Methods of space maintenance for premature loss of a primary molar: a review 
260 0 |b Springer Verlag  |c 2018 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-018-0357-5 
520 3 |a Aim: This critical appraisal attempts to answer the question: What is the best method of space maintenance (SM) following premature loss of a primary molar in children under 12 years old? Methods: A search to identify studies relevant to the PICO was conducted. Single case reports and studies prior to 1986 were excluded. The principles of GRADE were followed to appraise the evidence. Results: 20 studies were identified, which evaluated 2265 space maintainers (SMs). Two studies were graded high quality, four moderate, eight low, and six very low. All studies reported on longevity outcomes and most on adverse effects. Conclusions: There was no strong evidence favouring a particular SM, the following recommendations were made: (a) strong recommendations: In cases where rubber dam cannot be used clinicians should not use Glass Fibre Reinforced Composite Resin (GFRCR) SMs. (b) Weak recommendations: Crown and Loop SMs are recommended for loss of primary first molars; GFRCR SMs (placed under rubber dam) are recommended for loss of primary second molars. Bilateral SMs may have questionable efficacy and their use where there is loss of multiple molars in the same quadrant should be weighed against the risk of unwanted tooth movements, loss of a removable SM or no space maintenance at all. © 2018, The Author(s). 
650 0 4 |a child 
650 0 4 |a Child 
650 0 4 |a Deciduous molar 
650 0 4 |a deciduous tooth 
650 0 4 |a devices 
650 0 4 |a human 
650 0 4 |a Humans 
650 0 4 |a Molar 
650 0 4 |a molar tooth 
650 0 4 |a Orthodontic Appliance Design 
650 0 4 |a Orthodontic Appliances 
650 0 4 |a orthodontic device 
650 0 4 |a orthodontic procedure 
650 0 4 |a Primary molar 
650 0 4 |a procedures 
650 0 4 |a Space maintainer 
650 0 4 |a Space maintenance 
650 0 4 |a Space Maintenance, Orthodontic 
650 0 4 |a Tooth loss 
650 0 4 |a Tooth, Deciduous 
700 1 |a Ahmad, A.J.  |e author 
700 1 |a Ashley, P.F.  |e author 
700 1 |a Parekh, S.  |e author 
773 |t European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry