Does the Angulation of an Impacted Mandibular third Molar Affect the Prevalence of Preoperative Pathoses?

Altan, Ahmet; Akbulut, Nihat

doi:10.30476/dentjods.2019.44563

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Gaziosmanpaşa University, Tokat, Turkey.

https://doi.org/10.30476/dentjods.2019.44563

Abstract

Statement of the Problem: The removal of a third molar tooth associated with a pathological condition is usually an easy decision. However, it is necessary for clinicians to know about the prevalence of preoperative pathologies associated with impacted mandibular third molars to the identification of the prophylactic approach to be applied to symptom-free impacted third molars.Purpose: The objective was to investigate the effect of the angulation of impacted mandibular third molars on the prevalence of associated pathologies.Materials and Method: In this retrospective study, we examined the panoramic radiographs of 954 patients referred for impacted third molar surgery. A total of 1598 impacted mandibular third molar teeth were included in the study. Pathological conditions included the caries on distal surface of the adjacent second molar, caries on impacted mandibular third molars, bone loss distal to the adjacent second molar, the radiolucent area distal to the impacted mandibular third molar were determined.Results: Caries were observed more in the impacted third molar (18.9%) compared to the adjacent second molar (15.8%). The radiolucent area on distal surface of the impacted mandibular molar was 11%, while the periodontal bone loss distal to the adjacent second molar was 4.9%. Mesioangular-impacted mandibular third molars had high risk of caries development on second and third molar. The prevalence of periodontal tissue damage to the adjacent second molar was higher in horizontal and mesioangular angulation. Vertical and distoangular-impacted mandibular third molars had high risk for bone loss at distal aspect.Conclusion: The prevalence rate of pathological conditions in mesioangular impacted teeth was higher.

Keywords

References

1. Damlar İ, Altan A, Tatlı U, Arpağ OF. Retrospective Investigation of the Prevalence of Impacted Teeth in Hatay. Cukurova Med J. 2014; 39: 559–565. [Google Scholar]

2. Polat HB, Ozan F, Kara I, Ozdemir H, Ay S. Prevalence of commonly found pathoses associated with mandibular impacted third molars based on panoramic radiographs in Turkish population. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008; 105: e41–e47. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Fuster Torres MA, Gargallo Albiol J, Berini Aytés, L Gay, Escoda C. Evaluation of the indication for surgical extraction of thirdmolars according to the oral surgeon and the primary caredentist. Experience in the Master of Oral Surgery and Implantology at Barcelona University Dental School. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal . 2008; 13: E499–E504. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Hashemipour MA, Tahmasbi-Arashlow M, Fahimi-Hanzaei F. Incidence of impacted mandibular and maxillary third molars: a radiographic study in a Southeast Iran population. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2013; 18: e140–e145. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Winter GB. Principles of exodontia as applied to the impacted third molar. 1st ed. American Medical Books: St Louis; 1926. pp. 241–279. [Google Scholar]

6. Shiller WR. Positional changes in mesio-angular impacted mandibular thirdmolars during a year. J Am Dent Assoc. 1979; 99: 460–464. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Bataineh AB, Albashaireh ZS, Hazza'a AM. The surgical removal of mandibular third molars: a study in decision making. Quintessence Int. 2002; 33: 613–617. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Pell GJ, Gregory BT. Impacted mandibular third molars: classification and modified techniques for removal. Dent Digest. 1933; 39:330–338. [Google Scholar]

9. Chang SW, Shin SY, Kum KY, Hong J. Correlation study between distal caries in the mandibular secondmolar and the eruption status of the mandibular third molar in the Korean population. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009; 108: 838–843. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Chu FC, Li TK, Lui VK, Newsome PR, Chow RL, Cheung LK. Prevalence of impacted teeth and associated pathologies--a radiographic study of the Hong Kong Chinese population. Hong Kong Med J. 2003; 9: 158–163. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Ozeç I, Hergüner Siso S, Taşdemir U, Ezirganli S, Göktolga G. Prevalence and factors affecting the formation of second molardistal caries in a Turkish population. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 38: 1279–1282. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Van der Linden W, Cleaton-Jones P, Lownie M. Diseases and lesions associated with third molars. Review of 1001 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1995; 79: 142–145. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Falci SG, de Castro CR, Santos RC, de Souza Lima LD, Ramos-Jorge ML, Botelho AM, et al. Association between the presence of a partially eruptedmandibular third molar and the existence of caries in the distal of the second molars. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 41: 1270–1274. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. McArdle LW, Renton TF. Distal cervical caries in the mandibular second molar: an indication for the prophylactic removal of the third molar? Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 44: 42–45. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Al-Khateeb TH, Bataineh AB. Pathology associated with impacted mandibular third molars in a group of Jordanians. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 64: 1598–1602. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Stephens RG, Kogon SL, Reid JA. The unerupted or impacted third molar--a critical appraisal of its pathologic potential. J Can Dent Assoc. 1989; 55: 201–207. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Sewerin I, von Wowern N. A radiographic four-year follow-up study of asymptomaticmandibular third molars in young adults. Int Dent J. 1990; 40: 24–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Ahlqwist M, Gröndahl HG. Prevalence of impacted teeth and associated pathology in middle-aged and older Swedish women. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1991; 19: 116–119. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Brickley M, Shepherd J, Mancini G. Comparison of clinical treatment decisions with US NationalInstitutes of Health consensus indications for lower third molar removal. Br Dent J. 1993; 175: 102–105. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Clark HC, Curzon ME. A prospective comparison between findings from a clinicalexamination and results of bitewing and panoramic radiographsfor dental caries diagnosis in children. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2004;5:203–209. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Akarslan ZZ, Akdevelioğlu M, Güngör K, Erten H. A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of bitewing, periapical, unfiltered and filtered digital panoramic images for approximalcaries detection in posterior teeth. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008; 37: 458–463. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Journal of Dentistry

Does the Angulation of an Impacted Mandibular third Molar Affect the Prevalence of Preoperative Pathoses?

References

References

Volume 20, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
March 2019
Pages 48-52

Does the Angulation of an Impacted Mandibular third Molar Affect the Prevalence of Preoperative Pathoses?

References

References

Volume 20, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1March 2019Pages 48-52

Volume 20, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
March 2019
Pages 48-52