Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Istinye University, Vadi Campus, Ayazaga Mah. Azerbaycan Cad. (Vadistanbul 4A Blok), Sariyer, Istanbul, 34396, Turkey.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Sep 11;24(1):1072. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04819-0.
There is a general consensus among dental professionals regarding the extraction of impacted third molars in the presence of clinical symptoms. However, there is less agreement on the management of asymptomatic third molars. The objective of this study is to compare the perspectives of oral surgeons and orthodontists regarding the indications for the extraction of asymptomatic third molars. It is possible that healthcare professionals from different specialties may approach the extraction of these teeth in different ways.
In this cross-sectional study, a web-based questionnaire has been employed to collect data by inquiring about the reasons why participants prefer the extraction of asymptomatic third molars. Descriptive statistics were employed to evaluate the data obtained. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05.
Prophylactic extraction of partially impacted molars was more favored among the participants (P < 0.05). The orthodontists preferred prophylactic extraction due to the risk of late anterior dental crowding (LADC); however, the oral surgeons preferred pre-pregnancy extractions (P < 0.05). The extraction decision for partial impaction was higher in females when the risk of distal caries was considered. For fully impacted ones, it was higher in males when the risk of caries and pericoronitis were considered (P < 0.05).
Orthodontists preferred extraction because of the risk of LADC and caries, while oral surgeons focused on preventing pericoronitis, pathology, focal infection, and symptoms during pregnancy. This divergence between the participants may inform the guidelines for prophylactic management of third molars. These findings may be pertinent in gender medicine.
This study has been enlightening for departments to consult each other before the extraction of a patient's asymptomatic third molar.
对于存在临床症状的阻生第三磨牙，牙科专业人员普遍认为应将其拔除。然而，对于无症状的第三磨牙的处理方法，意见则不太一致。本研究的目的是比较口腔外科医生和正畸医生对拔除无症状第三磨牙适应证的看法。不同专业的医疗保健专业人员可能会以不同的方式处理这些牙齿的拔除。
在这项横断面研究中，我们采用了基于网络的问卷调查来收集数据，询问参与者选择拔除无症状第三磨牙的原因。采用描述性统计方法来评估所获得的数据。显著性水平设为 P < 0.05。
部分萌出的磨牙预防性拔除更受参与者的青睐（P < 0.05）。正畸医生倾向于预防性拔除，因为有迟发性前牙拥挤（LADC）的风险；然而，口腔外科医生则倾向于在怀孕前拔牙（P < 0.05）。当考虑到远中龋的风险时，女性更倾向于对部分萌出的磨牙进行预防性拔除。对于完全萌出的磨牙，当考虑到龋病和冠周炎的风险时，男性更倾向于拔除（P < 0.05）。
正畸医生倾向于拔除，因为有 LADC 和龋病的风险，而口腔外科医生则侧重于预防冠周炎、病理、局灶性感染和妊娠期间的症状。这种参与者之间的分歧可能为预防性管理第三磨牙的指南提供信息。这些发现可能与性别医学有关。
这项研究为患者的无症状第三磨牙拔除前，各科室之间的相互咨询提供了启示。
