medigraphic.com
ISSN 2395-9215 (Print)
Órgano Oficial de Difusión de la Facultad de Odontología de la UNAM

2016, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Ortodon 2016; 4 (4)

Evaluation of dimensions of the distal alveolar bone of the second molar by cone beam after extraction of third molars

de la Hoz CA, Oyola YE, Vergara VP, Bustillo JM

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 234-239
PDF size: 227.18 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Several studies have assessed the quality of periodontal tissues adjacent to the second molar after extraction of third molars using clinical assessment and radiographs. In clinical practice, the space occupied by these molars is used to perform distalizing movements and tissue integrity is a condition to do it, so it is necessary to evaluate with suitable methods such as digital volume tomography alveolar bone quality, before and after the removal of third molars. The aim of the study was to evaluate through cone beam dimensions the distal alveolar bone of the second molar after third molar extractions in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. A quasi-experimental study was implemented with a six months follow up in patients with orthodontic treatment that attended the post-graduate clinic of the University of Cartagena. The sample consisted of 128 molars of 32 individuals treated with fixed appliances. Bone dimensions behaved as follows: height was 3.44 mm T0, T1 of 3.96 mm and 3.44 mm in T2; the thickness was 2.90 mm T0, T1 was 2.79 mm and 3.37 mm T2; T0 width was 15.58 mm, 15.50 mm in T1 and T2 of 15.19 mm. The alveolar process can recover its dimensions after extraction thanks to dental movements generated by orthodontics thus maintaining a stability which results in periodontal health.


REFERENCES

  1. Soo W, Rahman R, Taib H. Effects of lower third molar removal on attachment level and alveolar bone height of the adjacent second molar. Arch Orofacial Sci. 2009; 4: 36-40.

  2. Hashemipour M, Tahmasbi M, Fahimi F. Incidence of impacted mandibular and maxillary third molars: a radiographic study in Southeast Iran population. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2013; 10: 140-145.

  3. Chaparro-Avendaño AV, Pérez-García S, Valmaseda-Castellón E, Berini-Aytés L, Gay-Escoda C. Morbidity of third molar extraction in patients between 12 and 18 years of age. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2005; 10: 422-431.

  4. Corral I, Hernández F. Prevalencia de inclusión dental y patología asociada en pacientes de la clínica de la facultad de odontología Mexicali de la UABC. Rev Odonto Mex. 2005; 9: 84-91.

  5. Vukovic A, Komsic S, Prohic S. Incidence of impacted mandibular third molar in population of Bosnia-Herzegovina: a retrospective radiographic study. J Health Sci. 2013; 2: 151-158.

  6. Lakhani MJ, Kadri W, Mehdi H, Sukhia H, Bano A, Yaqoob S. Anterior arch crowding: a posible predictor of mandibular third molar impaction. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2011; 23: 63-65.

  7. Mettes TD, Ghaeminia H, Nienhuijs ME, Perry J, van der Sanden WJ, Plasschaert A. Surgical removal versus retention for the management of asymptomatic impacted wisdom teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 6: CD003879.

  8. Marin G, Hazan Z. Distalización de molares diferentes métodos. Rev Bras Orto. 2001; 16: 25-29.

  9. Poletti L, Silvera AA, Ghislanzoni LT. Dentoalveolar class III treatment using retromolar miniscrew anchorage. Prog Orthod. 2013; 42: 14-17.

  10. Costa MG, Pazzini CA, Pantuzo MC, Jorge ML, Marques LS. Is there justification for prophylactic extraction of third molars? A systematic review. Braz Oral Res. 2013; 27: 183-188.

  11. Nováčková S, Marek I, Kaminec M. Orthodontic tooth movement: bone formation and its stability over time. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139: 37-43.

  12. Verna C, Zaffe D, Siciliani G. Histomorphometric study of bone reaction during orthodontic tooth movement in rats. Bone. 1999; 24: 371-379.

  13. Patil S, Prabhu A, Ranjan R. Quantitative digital subtraction radiography (DSR) as an approach for evaluating cretal alveolar bone density changes around teeth following orthodontic tooth movement. Int J Clin Den Sci. 2011; 2: 94-100.

  14. Bollen AM. Effects of malocclusions and orthodontics on periodontal health: evidence from a systematic review. J Dent Educ. 2008; 72: 912-918.

  15. Jäger A, Radlanski RJ, Taufall D, Klein C, Steinhöfel N, Döler W. Quantitative determination of alveolar bone density using digital image analysis of microradiographs. Anat Anz. 1990; 170: 171-179.

  16. Drage NA, Palmer RM, Blake G, Wilson R, Crane F, Fogelman I. A comparison of bone mineral density in the spine, hip and jaws of edentulous subjects. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18: 496-500.

  17. Al Haffar I, Padilla F, Nefussi R, Kolta S, Foucart JM, Laugier P. Experimental evaluation of bone quality measuring speed of sound in cadaver mandibles. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006; 102: 782-791.

  18. Huja SS, Beck FM. Bone remodeling in maxilla, mandible and femur of young dogs. Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2008; 291 (1): 1-5.

  19. Amler, M. The time sequence of tissue regeneration in human extraction wounds. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1969; 27 (3): 309-318.

  20. Jacobs FJ. The effect of innovative screw angled mini implants on biomechanical stability of mono-cortical-fixation: an in vitro model in maxillo-facial and oral surgery. PhD Thesis University of Pretoria. 2009

  21. Hylander W. Stress and strain in the mandibular symphysis of primates: a test of competing hypotheses. Am J Physic Anthropol. 1984; 64 (1): 1-46.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com