| Literature DB >> 35606483 |
Ighor Andrade Fernandes1, Endi Lanza Galvão2, Patricia Furtado Gonçalves2, Saulo Gabriel Moreira Falci2.
Abstract
The decision on retaining or prophylactically removing asymptomatic lower third molars is still discussed in the literature. This study aimed to verify the association between asymptomatic lower third molars and local bone conditions through periapical radiographs. Based on sample size calculations, 288 radiographs were required. Dependent variables were alveolar bone crest status and radiolucency between the distal aspect of the third molar crown and the ascending mandibular ramus. Independent variables were sex, age, Pell and Gregory and Winter's classification, angulation and distance between second and third molars, third molar side. Advanced ages (OR 1.15; CI 1.08-1.24; p < 0.001) and greater third molar angulations (OR 1.03; CI 1.01-1.04; p < 0.001) significantly increased the chance of radiographic alterations in the bone crest between second and third molars. Radiolucency distal to third molars was solely impacted by patient's age (OR 1.05; CI 1.01-1.11; p = 0.036). Older patients and lower third molars with greater angulations about adjacent second molar should be evaluated for third molar removal because of the increased chance of alveolar bone crest alterations. Older patients should also be monitored for wider radiolucent pericoronal spaces distal to lower third molars and its consequences.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35606483 PMCID: PMC9127109 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-12729-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Angulation between lower 3 M and adjacent 2 M. A line drawn parallel to the 3 M occlusal plane, touching the tips of the cusps and traced along the mesiodistal axis of the tooth, was used as a reference. A similar line drawn parallel to the adjacent 2 M occlusal plane intersects the reference line and creates an angle. (A) The angle created below the reference line is classified as negative. (B) The angle created above the reference line is classified as positive.
Figure 2Variables’ descriptions. (A) Bone loss was evaluated according to the distance (mm) between CEJ and present marginal bone level in the distal aspect of lower 2Ms when in the presence of adjacent 3Ms. (B) *Radiolucency between distal aspect of lower 3M crown and mandibular ramus was measured as the distance (mm) between the extremity of the distal aspect of the dental crown and the more distant point of bone resorption. (C) Pell and Gregory classification about mandibular ramus: Class I—mandibular ramus located distal to the 3M; Class II—mandibular ramus located between the distal surface and middle of the lower 3M crown; Class III—mandibular ramus located between the mesial surface and middle of the lower 3M crown. (D) Pell and Gregory classification about the occlusal plane: Class A—3M occlusal plane is located at the same level or above the occlusal plane of the adjacent 2M; Class B—3M occlusal plane is located between occlusal plane and cervical line of the adjacent 2M; Class C—3M occlusal plane is located below the cervical line of the adjacent 2M. (E) Leone classification: distance (mm) between 2 and 3M is determined by the distance between CEJ of the mesial aspect of the 3M and CEJ of the distal aspect of the adjacent 2M.
Frequency distribution plus univariate/multivariate logistic regression model: Bone crest status and independent variables.
| Total (n) | Alveolar bone crest status | Univariate OR (CI 95%) | Multivariate OR (CI 95%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preserved | Altered | ||||||
| Male | 102 | 84 | 18 | 1 | 0.053* | 1 | 0.140 |
| Female | 186 | 168 | 18 | 0.50 (0.24–1.01) | 0.52 (0.22–1.23) | ||
| Age (years) | 288 | 22.35 (± 4.36) | 28.39 (± 9.13) | 1.16 (1.09–1.24) | < 0.001** | 1.15 (1.08–1.24) | < 0.001** |
| Angulation between 3 and 2M | 288 | 16.34 (± 28.65) | 48.33 (± 25.51) | 1.03 (1.02–1.04) | < 0.001** | 1.03 (1.01–1.04) | < 0.001** |
| Distance from CEJ (mm) | 288 | 3.10 (± 2.25) | 5.49 (± 2.02) | 1.47 (1.27–1.71) | < 0.001** | – | – |
| 38 (left) | 138 | 119 | 19 | 1 | – | – | |
| 48 (right) | 150 | 133 | 17 | 0.80 (0.39–1.61) | 0.533 | – | – |
| I | 121 | 113 | 8 | 1 | 0.012** | 1 | 0.085 |
| II | 167 | 139 | 28 | 2.84 (1.30–9.91) | 2.27 (0.92–6.14) | ||
| III | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | |||
| A | 48 | 37 | 11 | 1 | 0.019** | – | – |
| B | 240 | 215 | 25 | 0.39 (0.18–0.88) | – | – | |
| C | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | |
| Vertical | 129 | 125 | 4 | 1 | – | – | |
| Mesioangular | 93 | 71 | 22 | 1.21 (0.52–2.77) | 0.640 | – | – |
| Horizontal | 28 | 19 | 9 | 1.78 (0.53–5.19) | 0.308 | – | – |
| Distoangular | 38 | 37 | 1 | 1.24 (0.37–3.52) | 0.695 | – | – |
Data are presented as n of subjects (%) or as mean ± SD.
OR odds ratio, CI 95% 95% of confidence interval.
*p < 0.20; **p < 0.05.
Frequency distribution plus univariate/multivariate logistic regression model: radiolucency in the 3M distal and independent variables.
| Total (n) | Radiolucency in the distal aspect of the 3M (mm) | Univariate OR (CI 95%) | Multivariate OR (CI 95%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 to 1.99 | 2.00 to 4.10 | ||||||
| Male | 102 | 91 | 11 | 1 | – | – | |
| Female | 186 | 160 | 26 | 1.34 (0.64–2.95) | 0.439 | – | – |
| Age (years) | 288 | 23.28 (± 5.75) | 21.89 (± 3.70) | 1.05 (1.01–1.11) | 0.031** | 1.05 (1.01–1.11) | 0.036** |
| Angulation | 288 | 22.25 (± 31.16) | 7.38 (± 17.59) | 1.00 (0.99–1.01) | 0.689 | – | – |
| Distance (mm) | 288 | 3.54 (± 2.43) | 2.50 (± 1.56) | 0.99 (0.85–1.14) | 0.970 | – | – |
| 38 (left) | 138 | 117 | 21 | 1 | – | – | |
| 48 (right) | 150 | 134 | 16 | 0.66 (0.32–1.32) | 0.251 | – | – |
| I | 48 | 42 | 6 | 1 | – | – | |
| II | 240 | 209 | 31 | 0.83 (0.41–1.68) | 0.604 | – | – |
| III | 0 | – | – | ||||
| A | 121 | 104 | 17 | 1 | – | – | |
| B | 167 | 147 | 20 | 1.03 (0.43–2.89) | 0.937 | – | – |
| C | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | |||
| Vertical | 129 | 105 | 24 | 1 | 1 | ||
| Mesioangular | 93 | 86 | 7 | 0.35 (0.13–0.82) | 0.022** | 0.45 (0.17–1.02) | 0.074 |
| Horizontal | 34 | 28 | 6 | 3.78e−08 (1.23e−170–9.72e+17) | 0.988 | – | – |
| Distoangular | 69 | 32 | 37 | 0.82 (0.28–2.07) | 0.691 | – | – |
Data are presented as n of subjects (%) or as mean ± SD.
OR odds ratio, CI 95% 95% of confidence interval.
*p < 0.20; **p < 0.05.