| Literature DB >> 32972396 |
Z Y Yan1, Y Tan2, X Y Xie3, W He1, C B Guo4, N H Cui5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The periodontal healing distal to the mandibular second molar (M2M) after coronectomy of the M3M has shown controversial results. We aimed to combine a digital method with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and estimate periodontal healing of M2M after M3M coronectomy. An accurate and stable indicator in three dimensions was also explored tentatively.Entities:
Keywords: Computer-aided 3D assessment; Coronectomy; Distal intra-bony defect; Periodontal healing; Re-contact; Volume of bone regenerated
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32972396 PMCID: PMC7513308 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01250-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Fig. 1Construction and measurement using the digital model. a Construction of a digital model of an extraction socket. b Registration of a model of an extraction socket at different times (BL model in gray, Po.6 m model in blue). c 3D color map of the geometric deviation of the M2M at different times: the deviation range was set between −0.5 mm and 0.5 mm. The map started with blue (negative-error area), then passed through green (near no-error area), and ended with red (positive-error area). d Volume of total bone regenerated in a tooth socket (blue model). e Border of the M2M was expanded by 2 mm (transparent pink). Bone regeneration in the distal 2 mm of the M2M was determined as the interaction part of bone regenerated in the tooth socket (blue model) and expanded 2 mm of the M2M (transparent pink). f The DBD of the M2M at BL (transparent gray) and bone regeneration in the distal 2 mm of the M2M (blue model) could be observed visually. g Selection of DB, DM and DL sites of the M2M. h Measurement of the DBD depth of the M2M. Extraction-socket model at BL (bone margin is described as a green line) and Po.6 m (bone margin is described as a red line) was registered. The DBD depth at Po.6 m (red arrow) and reduction in the DBD depth (green arrow) was assessed, respectively. DBD = distal intra-bony defect
Variation in the PD and DBD depth between BL and Po.6 m and difference between them
| DBD depth ≥ 4 mm | DBD depth (mm) | PD (mm) | PD reduction vs DBD depth reduction (mm) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BL | Po.6 m | BL | Po.6 m | BL | Po.6 m | PD reduction | DBD depth reduction | Difference | |||||
| % | % | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | |||||
| 18.31 | 6.10 | 2.70 ± 1.86 | 1.91 ± 1.19 | 6.33 ± 2.07 | 5.67 ± 1.18 | 0.61 ± 2.01 | 0.79 ± 1.38 | − 0.21 ± 2.36 | |||||
| 63.38 | 27.70 | 4.72 ± 2.17 | 3.18 ± 1.57 | 11.25 ± 3.70 | 4.57 ± 1.34 | 6.62 ± 3.88 | 1.55 ± 1.66 | 5.03 ± 4.00 | |||||
| 72.77 | 45.07 | 5.43 ± 2.29 | 3.95 ± 1.84 | 13.92 ± 2.74 | 6.94 ± 2.13 | 6.94 ± 3.04 | 1.50 ± 1.59 | 5.38 ± 2.84 | |||||
| 51.49 | 26.29 | 4.28 ± 1.66 | 3.01 ± 1.28 | 10.50 ± 1.72 | 5.73 ± 1.27 | 4.72 ± 1.86 | 1.28 ± 1.24 | 3.38 ± 1.84 | |||||
DBD Distal intra-bony defect. PD at BL was the distance from the distal marginal ridge of the M2M to the bottom of the DBD. PD at Po.6 m was the distance from the distal marginal ridge of the M2M to the junctional epithelium. “NS” denotes “no significant difference”
Fig. 2Correlation between different sites and different parameters. DB = disto-buccal; DM = disto-middle; DL = disto-lingual; DBD = distal intra-bony defect; BR in 2 mm = volume of bone regenerated in the distal 2 mm of M2M
Correlation analyses of previously reported and coronectomy-related factors
| M3M condition | M2M condition | Coronectomy-related factors | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | P&G‘s depth of impaction | Angulation of M3M | RMS | DBD depth at BL | ERR | Enamel remains | Root migration | Root rotation | Total volume of bone regenerated in tooth socket | Thickness of calcification bridge above root section | ||
| −0.23 | 0.20 | 0.37 | −0.36 | 0.59 | −0.08 | − 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.19 | −0.01 | 0.27 | ||
| −0.09 | 0.07 | 0.28 | −0.26 | 0.17 | −0.01 | − 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.06 | −0.03 | 0.30 | ||
| −0.21 | 0.28 | 0.43 | −0.44 | 0.42 | −0.04 | − 0.02 | 0.09 | 0.24 | 0.20 | 0.25 | ||
DBD Distal intra-bony defect, RMS Retromolar space, ERR External root resorption, r correlation coefficient; “NS” denotes “no significant difference”
Factors influencing bone variation and re-contact of the root complex and M2M
| Multiple linear regression | Variables | B | Coef | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | −0.07 | −0.28 | ||
| RMS | −0.07 | −0.13 | ||
| DBD depth at BL | 0.49 | 0.66 | ||
| Rotation of root complex | 0.02 | 0.12 | ||
| Eruption status of root complex | 0.50 | 0.19 | ||
| Age | −1.21 | −0.23 | ||
| RMS | −1.76 | −0.17 | ||
| DBD depth at BL | 5.69 | 0.36 | ||
| Rotation of root complex | 0.52 | 0.14 | ||
| Total volume of bone regenerated in tooth socket | 0.02 | 0.14 | ||
| Eruption status of root complex | 9.64 | 0.18 | ||
| RMS | 0.67 | 0.46–0.97 | ||
| Enamel remains | 6.93 | 1.13–42.58 | ||
DBD Distal intra-bony defect, RMS Retromolar space. “NS” denotes “no significant difference”
Different multiple linear regression models for PD reduction
| Independent factors included | Variables | B | Coef | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | −0.05 | −0.13 | ||
| DBD depth at BL | −0.07 | −0.07 | ||
| PD at BL | 0.85 | 0.78 | ||
| Age | −0.01 | −0.03 | ||
| DBD depth at BL | −0.33 | −0.30 | ||
| PD at BL | 0.86 | 0.79 | ||
| 0.49 | 0.33 | |||
| Age | −0.07 | −0.19 | ||
| DBD depth at BL | 0.37 | 0.34 | ||
| PD at BL | 0.20 | 0.19 | ||
| 0.73 | 0.73 | |||
DBD Distal intra-bony defect, RMS Retromolar space. “NS” denotes “no significant difference”
Note: aThe DBD depth was regarded to be a factor related hard-tissue variation. #The difference between PD reduction and reduction in DBD depth was regarded to be a factor related to soft-tissue variation