-
Australian Dental Journal Dec 2017Inflammatory complications such as pain, swelling, trismus, infection and alveolar osteitis have an adverse affect on the quality of life of patients after third molar... (Review)
Review
Inflammatory complications such as pain, swelling, trismus, infection and alveolar osteitis have an adverse affect on the quality of life of patients after third molar removal. This review presents the current evidence on postoperative strategies to reduce these complications. A literature search was performed to identify articles published in English between 2000 to 2016 using the following keywords: third molar(s), wisdom tooth/teeth, pain, swelling, trismus, infection, alveolar osteitis and dry socket. In total, 221 papers were reviewed. Methods published included analgesics, antibiotics, corticosteroids, mouthwashes, topical gels, cryotherapy and ozone therapy. This review highlights the variability in evidence available and summarizes the findings from best-quality evidence. In conclusion, paracetamol and ibuprofen are efficacious in managing postoperative pain. Corticosteroids and antibiotics should only be used in selected cases. Chlorhexidine reduces alveolar osteitis. The benefits of cryotherapy, postoperative irrigation and ozone gel are yet to be established.
Topics: Dry Socket; Humans; Inflammation; Molar, Third; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Complications; Tooth Extraction
PubMed: 28498604
DOI: 10.1111/adj.12526 -
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi = Huaxi... Apr 2020Primary tooth root canal therapy is a treatment performed on primary teeth diagnosed with pulpitis or periapical periodontitis. This procedure requires perfect... (Review)
Review
Primary tooth root canal therapy is a treatment performed on primary teeth diagnosed with pulpitis or periapical periodontitis. This procedure requires perfect instrumentation, disinfection, and filling of root canals to eliminate infection, control inflammation, relieve pain, prevent pathological effects on inherited permanent tooth, and prolong primary tooth preservation. This paper reviews the research history on primary tooth root canal treatment and summarizes the progress on primary tooth root canal treatment, including anatomical morphology, root canal preparation, root canal disinfection, root canal filling, and application of antibiotics.
Topics: Dental Pulp Cavity; Humans; Periapical Periodontitis; Root Canal Filling Materials; Root Canal Obturation; Root Canal Preparation; Root Canal Therapy; Tooth, Deciduous
PubMed: 32314896
DOI: 10.7518/hxkq.2020.02.016 -
Journal of Dental Research Jan 2020This multicenter 3-arm, parallel-group, patient-randomized controlled trial compared clinical effectiveness of 3 treatment strategies over 3 y for managing dental caries... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
This multicenter 3-arm, parallel-group, patient-randomized controlled trial compared clinical effectiveness of 3 treatment strategies over 3 y for managing dental caries in primary teeth in UK primary dental care. Participants aged 3 to 7 y with at least 1 primary molar with dentinal carious lesion were randomized across 3 arms (1:1:1 via centrally administered system with variable-length random permuted blocks): C+P, conventional carious lesion management (complete carious tooth tissue removal and restoration placement) with prevention; B+P, biological management (sealing in carious tooth tissue restoratively) with prevention; and PA, prevention alone (diet, plaque removal, fluorides, and fissure sealants). Parents, children, and dentists were not blind to allocated arm. Co-primary outcomes were 1) the proportion of participants with at least 1 episode of dental pain and/or infection and 2) the number of episodes of dental pain and/or infection during follow-up (minimum, 23 mo). In sum, 1,144 participants were randomized (C+P, = 386; B+P, = 381; PA, = 377) by 72 general dental practitioners, of whom 1,058 (C+P, = 352; B+P, = 352; PA, = 354) attended at least 1 study visit and were included in the primary analysis. The median follow-up was 33.8 mo (interquartile range, 23.8 to 36.7). Proportions of participants with at least 1 episode of dental pain and/or infection were as follows: C+P, 42%; B+P, 40%; PA, 45%. There was no evidence of a difference in incidence of dental pain and/or infection when B+P (adjusted risk difference [97.5% CI]: -2% [-10% to 6%]) or PA (4% [-4% to 12%]) was compared with C+P. The mean (SD) number of episodes of dental pain and/or infection were as follows: C+P, 0.62 (0.95); B+P, 0.58 (0.87); and PA, 0.72 (0.98). Superiority could not be concluded for number of episodes between B+P (adjusted incident rate ratio (97.5% CI): 0.95 [0.75 to 1.21]) or PA (1.18 [0.94 to 1.48]) and C+P. In conclusion, there was no evidence of a difference among the 3 treatment approaches for incidence or number of episodes of dental pain and/or infection experienced by these participants with high caries risk and established disease (trial registration: ISRCTN77044005).
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Dental Caries; Dentists; Humans; Pit and Fissure Sealants; Professional Role; Tooth, Deciduous
PubMed: 31771385
DOI: 10.1177/0022034519888882 -
Dental and Medical Problems 2021Extractions of third molars constitute about 90% of the scheduled surgical procedures performed by oral surgeons. Wisdom tooth surgery is associated with complications,...
BACKGROUND
Extractions of third molars constitute about 90% of the scheduled surgical procedures performed by oral surgeons. Wisdom tooth surgery is associated with complications, such as the lingual and inferior alveolar nerve damage, bleeding, tooth/jaw fractures, tooth displacement into the adjacent anatomical spaces, trismus, infections, and other.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the study was to analyze complications after wisdom tooth extraction in patients treated at the Department of Oral Surgery of Jagiellonian University Medical College in Kraków, Poland, in the years 2016-2018.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A retrospective analysis of the medical records of 339 patients treated in the outpatient setting was performed. The inclusion criterion comprised a single extraction of a third molar. The exclusion criteria were multiple extractions, comorbidities and pregnancy. No antibiotic prophylaxis was used. The incidence of post-extraction complications, such as oroantral communication, postoperative hematoma, acute inflammation of the surrounding tissues, trismus, and transient paresthesia in relation to patient gender and age, the developmental stage and location of the removed tooth as well as the type of surgery were studied.
RESULTS
Perioperative complications occurred in 51 (15.0%) cases, and comprised the acute inflammation of the surrounding tissues in 31 patients, trismus after the removal of 13 lower third molars, oroantral communication after the extraction of 5 upper wisdom teeth, and hematoma as well as a transient sensory alteration of the lingual nerve in 1 case each. Complications were more common in patients who had a surgical extraction of a wisdom tooth with root separation and in cases of lower third molar extractions. No statistically significant correlation was found between the patients' age or gender, the developmental stage of the extracted tooth and the number of observed complications.
CONCLUSIONS
Lower third molars and the necessity of surgical extraction with root separation are risk factors for postoperative complications in patients who require wisdom tooth removal. Complications after the removal of third molars are most often inflammatory.
Topics: Humans; Molar, Third; Poland; Retrospective Studies; Tooth Extraction; Tooth, Impacted
PubMed: 33789003
DOI: 10.17219/dmp/127028 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2014The incidence of impacted wisdom teeth (third molars) is high, with some 72% of Swedish people aged 20 to 30 years having at least one impacted wisdom tooth. Impacted... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The incidence of impacted wisdom teeth (third molars) is high, with some 72% of Swedish people aged 20 to 30 years having at least one impacted wisdom tooth. Impacted wisdom teeth occur because of a lack of space, obstruction, or abnormal position. They can cause inflammatory dental disease manifested by pain and swelling of infected teeth and may destroy adjacent teeth and bone.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: Should asymptomatic, disease-free impacted wisdom teeth be removed prophylactically? What are the effects of different operative (surgical) techniques for removing impacted wisdom teeth? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to October 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
RESULTS
We found 11 studies that met our inclusion criteria.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: prophylactic extraction, active surveillance, and different operative (surgical) techniques for extracting impacted wisdom teeth.
Topics: Humans; Molar, Third; Prophylactic Surgical Procedures; Tooth Extraction; Tooth, Impacted; United States
PubMed: 25170946
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021The most frequent indications for tooth extractions, generally performed by general dental practitioners, are dental caries and periodontal infections. Systemic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The most frequent indications for tooth extractions, generally performed by general dental practitioners, are dental caries and periodontal infections. Systemic antibiotics may be prescribed to patients undergoing extractions to prevent complications due to infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis on the prevention of infectious complications following tooth extractions.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register (to 16 April 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2020, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 April 2020), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 April 2020), and LILACS (1982 to 16 April 2020). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing tooth extraction(s) for any indication.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently performed data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment for the included studies. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For continuous outcomes, we used mean differences (MD) with 95% CI using random-effects models. We examined potential sources of heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for key outcomes as high, moderate, low, or very low, using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 trials that randomised approximately 3206 participants (2583 analysed) to prophylactic antibiotics or placebo. Although general dentists perform dental extractions because of severe dental caries or periodontal infection, only one of the trials evaluated the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in groups of patients affected by those clinical conditions. We assessed 16 trials as being at high risk of bias, three at low risk, and four as unclear. Compared to placebo, antibiotics may reduce the risk of postsurgical infectious complications in patients undergoing third molar extractions by approximately 66% (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64; 1728 participants; 12 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 19 people (95% CI 15 to 34) need to be treated with antibiotics to prevent one infection following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. Antibiotics may also reduce the risk of dry socket by 34% (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; 1882 participants; 13 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 46 people (95% CI 29 to 62) need to take antibiotics to prevent one case of dry socket following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. The evidence for our other outcomes is uncertain: pain, whether measured dichotomously as presence or absence (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.12; 675 participants; 3 studies) or continuously using a visual analogue scale (0-to-10-centimetre scale, where 0 is no pain) (MD -0.26, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.07; 422 participants; 4 studies); fever (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.79; 475 participants; 4 studies); and adverse effects, which were mild and transient (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.64; 1277 participants; 8 studies) (very low-certainty evidence). We found no clear evidence that the timing of antibiotic administration (preoperative, postoperative, or both) was important. The included studies enrolled a subset of patients undergoing dental extractions, that is healthy people who had surgical extraction of third molars. Consequently, the results of this review may not be generalisable to all people undergoing tooth extractions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The vast majority (21 out of 23) of the trials included in this review included only healthy patients undergoing extraction of impacted third molars, often performed by oral surgeons. None of the studies evaluated tooth extraction in immunocompromised patients. We found low-certainty evidence that prophylactic antibiotics may reduce the risk of infection and dry socket following third molar extraction when compared to placebo, and very low-certainty evidence of no increase in the risk of adverse effects. On average, treating 19 healthy patients with prophylactic antibiotics may stop one person from getting an infection. It is unclear whether the evidence in this review is generalisable to patients with concomitant illnesses or patients at a higher risk of infection. Due to the increasing prevalence of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotic treatment, clinicians should evaluate if and when to prescribe prophylactic antibiotic therapy before a dental extraction for each patient on the basis of the patient's clinical conditions (healthy or affected by systemic pathology) and level of risk from infective complications. Immunocompromised patients, in particular, need an individualised approach in consultation with their treating medical specialist.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Bacterial Infections; Bias; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Dry Socket; Humans; Molar, Third; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Complications; Tooth Extraction; Tooth, Impacted
PubMed: 33624847
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003811.pub3 -
RoFo : Fortschritte Auf Dem Gebiete Der... Mar 2019As dental imaging accounts for approximately 40 % of all X-ray examinations in Germany, profound knowledge of this topic is essential not only for the dentist but... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
As dental imaging accounts for approximately 40 % of all X-ray examinations in Germany, profound knowledge of this topic is essential not only for the dentist but also for the clinical radiologist. This review focuses on basic imaging findings regarding the teeth. Therefore, tooth structure, currently available imaging techniques and common findings in conserving dentistry including endodontology, periodontology, implantology and dental trauma are presented.
METHODS
Literature research on the current state of dental radiology was performed using Pubmed.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Currently, the most frequent imaging techniques are the orthopantomogram (OPG) and single-tooth radiograph, as well as computer tomography (CT) and cone beam CT mainly for implantology (planning or postoperative control) or trauma indications. Especially early diagnosis and correct classification of a dental trauma, such as dental pulp involvement, prevents from treatment delays or worsening of therapy options and prognosis. Furthermore, teeth are commonly a hidden focus of infection.Since radiologists are frequently confronted with dental imaging, either concerning a particular question such as a trauma patient or regarding incidental findings throughout head and neck imaging, further training in this field is more than worthwhile to facilitate an early and sufficient dental treatment.
KEY POINTS
· This review focuses on dental imaging techniques and the most important pathologies.. · Dental pathologies may not only be locally but also systemically relevant.. · Reporting of dental findings is important for best patient care..
CITATION FORMAT
· Masthoff M, Gerwing M, Masthoff M et al. Dental Imaging - A basic guide for the radiologist. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2019; 191: 192 - 198.
Topics: Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Dental Caries; Dental Implants; Dental Pulp; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Periodontitis; Periodontium; Radiography, Panoramic; Temporomandibular Joint; Tooth; Tooth Diseases; Tooth Injuries
PubMed: 29913523
DOI: 10.1055/a-0636-4129 -
European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry Dec 2021The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical outcome of partial pulpotomy, pulpotomy and pulpectomy for treating primary teeth with normal or infected...
AIM
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical outcome of partial pulpotomy, pulpotomy and pulpectomy for treating primary teeth with normal or infected pulp or with irreversible pulpitis.
METHODS
Two reviewers on Pubmed and ISI Web of Science performed a comprehensive literature review of publications from 1966 until July 2019. Pico outline was used to facilitate literature research. Among abstracts, publications were selected according to the following criteria: prospective clinical study, correct indication for the performed treatment, clear definition of clinical and/or radiographic success criteria and at least 6-month follow-up period. The strict selection criteria under the keywords "pulpotomy", "partial pulpotomy" and "pulpectomy" resulted in a limited amount of randomised controlled trials (RCT) or controlled clinical trials (CT). Qualitative assessment of the selected clinical studies and level of evidence was included according to the criteria described by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM).
CONCLUSION
Prerequisites for a successful pulpotomy are symptom-free teeth, sterile removal of coronal pulp and haemostasis. Both MTA and formocresol perform well for partial pulpotomies after caries exposure. Formocresol had been the most popular amputation material for pulpotomies. Due to the potential side effects, other medicaments, such as ferric sulfate, mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) or NaOCl are suggested. Grey and white MTA yeld the same results. Lasers are not recommended due to their large diversity. Regarding pulpectomy, the conditions, procedures, and evaluation for the treatment were not well defined in the studies. Nevertheless, there is evidence to use calcium hydroxide, zinc oxide eugenol paste or iodoform based pastes as root filling materials for non-vital molars. Pulpectomies showed better success rates than pulpotomies. Stainless steel crowns are recommended as definite restorations after both endodontic treatments. Longer follow-up periods, further clinical studies with comparable conditions and clear definition of evaluation criteria are needed to further confirm the results of endodontic treatment in primary teeth.
Topics: Calcium Compounds; Drug Combinations; Humans; Molar; Oxides; Pulpectomy; Pulpotomy; Silicates; Tooth, Deciduous; Treatment Outcome; Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement
PubMed: 35034465
DOI: 10.23804/ejpd.2021.22.04.4 -
Dental and Medical Problems 2022Exodontia procedures are not without complications, which are the dentist's responsibility to avoid by taking into account clinical, imaging, systemic, and operative... (Review)
Review
Exodontia procedures are not without complications, which are the dentist's responsibility to avoid by taking into account clinical, imaging, systemic, and operative factors, among others. The purpose of this systematic review is to determine and analyze the prevalence of complications post simple exodontia (CPES). The method used in this systematic review was adapted from the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA statement. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and ScienceDirect using the search terms "Exodontia" AND "Complications". The search was conducted from the starting coverage date to January 31, 2020. The inclusion criteria were studies on simple exodontia, studies on CPES prevalence and human studies. Studies on complications after third molar exodontia, generalities in exodontia, narratives and systematics literature reviews, book chapters, and animal studies were excluded. A total of 1,446 articles were found in the first search using the search strategy (725 in PubMed, 96 in Scopus and 631 in ScienceDirect). After duplicates were removed, 948 articles were obtained. After reading the title and abstract, 9 articles were read in full. Finally, 3 articles were included in the review, with the most common complications being trismus, alveolitis, pain, dehiscence, infections, and retained roots. Trismus of the chewing muscles, alveolitis and retained roots were the most prevalent CPES, which were most likely related to the surgeon's experience, surgery duration and tissue trauma during surgery.
Topics: Humans; Trismus; Tooth Extraction; Molar, Third; Risk Factors; Pain
PubMed: 36516334
DOI: 10.17219/dmp/144596 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Jul 2016Coronectomy is an alternative to complete removal of an impacted mandibular third molar. Most authors have recommended coronectomy to prevent damage to the inferior... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Coronectomy is an alternative to complete removal of an impacted mandibular third molar. Most authors have recommended coronectomy to prevent damage to the inferior alveolar nerve during surgical extraction of lower third molars. The present study offers a systematic review and metaanalysis of the coronectomy technique.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed based on a PubMed and Cochrane databases search for articles published from 2014 and involving coronectomy of mandibular third molars located near the inferior alveolar nerve canal, with a minimum of 10 cases and a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. After application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 12 articles were included in the study.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Coronectomy results in significantly lesser loss of sensitivity of the inferior alveolar nerve and prevents the occurrence of dry socket. No statistically significant differences were observed in the incidence of pain and infection between coronectomy and complete surgical extraction. After coronectomy, the remaining tooth fragment migrates an average of 2 mm within two years.
CONCLUSIONS
Coronectomy is indicated when the mandibular third molar is in contact with the inferior alveolar nerve and complete removal of the tooth may cause nerve damage.
Topics: Humans; Mandible; Mandibular Nerve; Molar, Third; Tooth Crown; Tooth Extraction; Tooth, Impacted; Trigeminal Nerve Injuries
PubMed: 27031064
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.21074