Impacts of Skeletal Anterior Open Bite Malocclusion on Speech.

Introduction: Articulation problems are seen in 80-90% of dentofacial deformity (DFD) subjects compared with 5% of the general population, impacting communication and quality of life, but the causal link is unclear. We hypothesize there are both qualitative (perceptual) and quantitative (spectral) differences in properties of stop (/t/ or /k/), fricative (/s/ or /∫/), and affricate (/t∫/) consonant sounds and that severity of anterior open bite (AOB) jaw disharmonies correlates with degree of speech abnormality. Methods: To test our hypotheses, surgical orthodontic records and audio recordings were collected from DFD patients (n=39 AOB, 62 controls). A speech pathologist evaluated subjects and recordings were analyzed using spectral moment analysis (SMA) to measure sound frequency distortions. Results: Perceptually, there is a higher prevalence of auditory and visual speech distortions in AOB DFD patients when compared to controls. Quantitatively, a significant (p<0.01) increase in the centroid frequency (M1) was seen in the /k/, /t/, /t∫/, and /s/ sounds of AOB subjects compared to the controls. Using linear regression, correlations between AOB skeletal severity and spectral distortion were found for /k/ and /t/ sounds. Conclusions: A higher prevalence of qualitative distortion and significant quantitative spectral distortions in consonant sounds were seen in AOB patients compared to controls. Additionally, severity of skeletal AOB is correlated with degree of distortion for consonant sounds. These findings provide insight into how the surgical and/or orthodontic treatment of AOB may impact speech.

Modified Carnoy's Compared to Carnoy's Solution Is Equally Effective in Preventing Recurrence of Odontogenic Keratocysts.

PURPOSE: Carnoy's solution (CS), the gold standard for adjunctive chemical cautery in treatment of odontogenic keratocysts (OKCs), has been banned for 7 years, leading to substitution with the non-chloroform containing modified Carnoy's solution (MC) without data to support its effectiveness. We performed this study to compare the earlier data with CS to the more current outcomes with MC. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients diagnosed with OKC and treated by a single surgeon (GHB) with enucleation and curettage (EC), peripheral ostectomy, and application of CS or MC. The primary predictor variables were use of CS or MC. The primary outcome variables were recurrence (yes vs. no) and time to recurrence. Secondary variables included demographics, anatomic location, and whether teeth adjacent to the lesion were extracted. Statistical analyses included chi-squared test/Fisher's exact test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, and Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: 77 patients, 36 patients in the CS group and 41 in the MC group, met inclusion criteria, including at least 1 year of follow-up time. Characteristics of the groups were similar: median age 41.5 and 46, 61% and 71% male gender, 81% and 90% posterior, and 64% and 50% mandibular lesions, respectively. Overall recurrence was similar, 14.29%, with 5 (13.9%) recurrences in the CS group and 6 (14.6%) in the MC group (P = 0.92). Median time to recurrence was 24 months for both groups. Preserving adjacent teeth was associated with a significant increase in recurrence (P = 0.0036). CONCLUSION: Based on this comparison of retrospective outcome data, we found no significant difference in recurrence rate or distribution of time to recurrence between OKCs treated with CS or MC. Aggressiveness of surgical technique is likely a predictive factor in recurrence rate. Future studies should focus on prospective studies and continuing follow-up of the MC group.

Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing One Percent Buffered Versus Two Percent Unbuffered Lidocaine Injections in Children.

Purpose: Buffered local anesthetics offer an alternative to conventional, unbuffered anesthetic formulations; however, evidence about their use in children is scant. The purpose of this study was to determine the anesthetic and physiologic differences associated with the use of buffered one percent and unbuffered two percent lidocaine (both with 1:100,000 epinephrine) in children. Methods: In this randomized, double-blinded, crossover study, 25 children ages 10 to 12 years old received two inferior alveolar never blocks, at least one week apart, randomized to alternating sequences of two drug formulations: (1) formula A-three mL buffered one percent lidocaine (i.e., including 0.3 mL of 8.4 percent sodium bicarbonate); or (2) formula B-three mL unbuffered two percent lidocaine. Primary outcomes were mean blood lidocaine levels (15 minutes post-injection), timing of clinical signs onset, response to pain on injection, and duration of anesthesia. Analyses relied upon analysis of variance for crossover study designs and a P<0.05 statistical significance criterion. Results: The buffered formulation resulted in significantly lower mean blood lidocaine levels compared to unbuffered-a 63 percent (P<0.05) weight-adjusted relative decrease. The authors found no important differences in pain upon injection, onset, and duration of anesthesia. Conclusion: The buffered local anesthetic formulation showed equal effectiveness with a double-concentration unbuffered formulation while resulting in lower mean blood lidocaine levels-an important gain for the prevention of anesthetic toxicity.

A multimodal analgesic protocol may reduce opioid use after third molar surgery: A pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to assess the number of opioid doses available to patients from filled prescriptions after adoption, in 2017, of a multimodal analgesic protocol that included opioid prescribing to manage postoperative pain. STUDY DESIGN: Data were retrieved from records of the first 24 patients having third molar surgery in 2017 identified from appointment schedules. Inclusion criteria were American Society of Anesthesiologists risk classification I or II, age 18 to 35 years, and at least 2 lower third molars removed. The exclusion criterion was being treated for opioid addiction/abuse. The primary outcome variable was the number of opioid doses filled by prescriptions at each patient's discretion. The primary predictor variable was the multimodal analgesic protocol. RESULTS: Data from records of 24 consecutive patients were analyzed; 83% were females. Median age was 25 years (interquartile range [IQR] 12-29 years). Median surgery time was 35 minutes (IQR 27-32 minutes). The median number of opioid doses filled in 2017 was 4 (IQR 0-4). CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes from this pilot study suggest that implementation of a multimodal analgesic protocol to manage postoperative pain, while limiting the number of opioid doses available to the patient, may be an effective strategy for a wider range of patients and procedures.

Buffered 1% Lidocaine With Epinephrine Can Be as Effective as Nonbuffered 2% Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Maxillary Field Block.

PURPOSE: Buffering local anesthetics with epinephrine (Epi) offers clinicians options not often considered. This study assessed outcomes for pulpal anesthesia, pain on injection, and time to midface numbness for buffered 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi versus nonbuffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this trial with a randomized, crossover design, buffered 1% lidocaine was compared with nonbuffered 2% lidocaine. Subjects were adult volunteers who served as their own controls. The predictor variables were alternate drug formulations. The outcome variables were subjects' responses to cold and electric pulp testing (EPT) stimulation of the maxillary first molar and canine, pain levels during the injection, and time to midface numbness. After maxillary field blocks with 40 mg of buffered lidocaine or 80 mg of nonbuffered lidocaine, subjects reported pain on injection and responses of the maxillary first molar and canine after cold and EPT stimulation. Teeth were tested before field block and at 30-minute intervals until a positive response was detected. Two weeks later, subjects were tested with the alternate drug combinations. For all outcome variables, assessment of treatment difference, calculated as 1% buffered minus 2% nonbuffered, was performed with the Wilcoxon rank sum test with significance at P < .05. RESULTS: More of the 24 subjects were women and Caucasian. The median age was 23.5 years (interquartile range, 21, 25 years), and the median body weight was 155 lb (interquartile range, 128.5, 176.5 lb). Pain levels during the injection were significantly lower for 1% buffered lidocaine, with P = .04. Times to response after injection were not significantly different between the 2 drug formulations for the cold test on a molar, with P = .08, or the cold test on a canine, with P = .22. However, times to response were significantly longer for nonbuffered drugs for EPT on the molar and canine, both with P = .01. CONCLUSIONS: Buffering 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi reduces the pain on injection with a maxillary field block and results in similar lengths of pulpal anesthesia tested with a cold stimulus as compared with nonbuffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi.

Buffered 1% Lidocaine With Epinephrine Is as Effective as Non-Buffered 2% Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Mandibular Nerve Block.

PURPOSE: To assess outcomes for pulpal anesthesia and pain on injection for buffered 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (EPI) versus non-buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 EPI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a randomized cross-over trial approved by the institutional review board, buffered 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 EPI was compared with non-buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 EPI. After mandibular nerve block with buffered lidocaine 40 mg or non-buffered lidocaine 80 mg, patients reported responses at the mandibular first molar and canine after cold and electrical pulp testing (EPT). Patients also reported pain on injection with a 10-point Likert-type scale. Teeth were tested before nerve block and at 30-minute intervals until a positive response returned. Two weeks later, patients were tested with the alternate drug combinations. The same outcomes were assessed. Predictor variables were alternate drug formulations. Outcome variables were patients' responses to cold and EPT stimulation of the mandibular first molar and canine and pain on injection. An assessment of treatment difference was performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Proc NPAR1WAY (SAS 9.3, SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Significance was set at a P value less than .05. RESULTS: Fifty-seven percent of patients were women and 43% were men. Seventy percent were Caucasian, 17% were African American, and 13% had another ethnicity. Median age was 25 years (interquartile range [IQR], 21-26 yr) and median body weight was 140 lbs (IQR, 120-155 lbs). After the cold test and EPT, the time to sensation return for the molar or canine was not statistically different between the 2 drug formulations. Patients reported significantly lower pain scores with the buffered versus non-buffered drug (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: After mandibular nerve block, buffered 1% lidocaine with EPI can produce similar clinical outcomes for duration of pulpal anesthesia as non-buffered 2% lidocaine with EPI and lower pain on injections, which are a potential benefit to patients.

Contrasting Patterns for Missing Third Molars in the United States and Sweden.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of third molars from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and the Swedish survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved the comparison of the only published data on third molar prevalence. The number of visible third molars in the NHANES of 2011 through 2012 were assessed in nonclinical settings by trained, calibrated dental hygienists and reported by age decade (approximately 5,000 patients). Similar data were reported for the Swedish population with data collected in clinical settings (approximately 700 patients). The primary outcome variable was the number of third molars (0 to 4); the predictor variables were age cohorts (20 to 29 through 70 to 79 yr). Outcome data were reported with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In the youngest cohort (20 to 29 yr), having no visible third molars was more likely in the US population than in the Swedish population (47 vs 2%, respectively). By 50 to 59 years, outcomes for no third molars were similar in the United States and Sweden (53 and 57%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The presence or absence of third molars reported from the US and Swedish populations presented contrasting patterns, particularly in the younger cohorts. More comprehensive and detailed data are required in future surveys as population studies on third molars become more important for clinicians and other stakeholders.

Buffered Versus Non-Buffered Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Mandibular Nerve Block: Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Outcomes for peak blood levels were assessed for buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine compared with non-buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved prospective, randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial, the clinical impact of buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (Anutra Medical, Research Triangle Park, Cary, NC) was compared with the non-buffered drug. Venous blood samples for lidocaine were obtained 30 minutes after a mandibular nerve block with 80 mg of the buffered or unbuffered drug. Two weeks later, the same subjects were tested with the alternate drug combinations. Subjects also reported on pain on injection with a 10-point Likert-type scale and time to lower lip numbness. The explanatory variable was the drug formulation. Outcome variables were subjects' peak blood lidocaine levels, subjective responses to pain on injection, and time to lower lip numbness. Serum lidocaine levels were analyzed with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Statistical analyses were performed using Proc TTEST (SAS 9.3; SAS Institute, Cary, NC), with the crossover option for a 2-period crossover design, to analyze the normally distributed outcome for pain. For non-normally distributed outcomes of blood lidocaine levels and time to lower lip numbness, an assessment of treatment difference was performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Proc NPAR1WAY (SAS 9.3). Statistical significance was set at a P value less than .05 for all outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-eight percent of subjects were women, half were Caucasian, 22% were African American, and 13% were Asian. Median age was 21 years (interquartile range [IQR], 20-22 yr), and median body weight was 147 lb (IQR, 130-170 lb). Median blood levels (44 blood samples) at 30 minutes were 1.19 µg/L per kilogram of body weight. Mean blood level differences of lidocaine for each patient were significantly lower after nerve block with the buffered drug compared with the non-buffered agent (P < .01). Mean score for pain on injection for nerve block (n = 46 scores) was 3.3 (standard deviation, 0.9). Seventy-eight percent of subjects reported lower or the same pain scores with the buffered drug; 61% of subjects reported a shorter time to lower lip numbness with the buffered drug. CONCLUSIONS: Buffering 2% lidocaine with epinephrine can produce clinical outcomes favorable for subjects and clinicians without clinically detrimental peak blood lidocaine levels.

Prevalence of Visible Third Molars in the United States Population: How Many Individuals Have Third Molars?

PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of third molars in the US population and to report the differences in prevalence of visible third molars in the most recent National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) population of 2011 through 2012 by participant, jaw, and demographics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The number of visible third molars in the NHANES data was assessed in nonclinical settings by trained, calibrated dental hygienists by decade of age beginning in the 20- to 29-year-old cohort through the 70- to 79-year-old cohort. Cross-sectional analyses of third molar data were conducted by the authors from the NHANES databases of 2001 through 2002, 2009 through 2010, and 2011 through 2012 to compare data for similarity of outcomes on third molar prevalence in the US population. Outcomes on third molar prevalence also were assessed from the NHANES of 2011 through 2012 by participant, jaw, and demographics: gender, race or ethnicity (Caucasian, African American, other), and education (less than high school, high school graduate, some college, college graduate). RESULTS: Data on the mean number of third molars from NHANES of 2001 through 2002, 2009 through 2010, and 2011 through 2012 were similar. The number of visible third molars in the NHANES of 2011 through 2012 decreased progressively from a mean of 1.48 in the 20- to 29-year-old cohort to 0.81 in the 60- to 69-year-old cohort, No visible third molars were observed in 47% of the 20- to 29-year-old cohort compared with 53% in the 50- to 59-year-old cohort. Participants who were male, non-Caucasian, and had less than a high school education were more likely to have a visible third molar in all age cohorts. No data were collected by NHANES examiners to determine why third molars were absent. CONCLUSION: Third molar prevalence did not appear to differ in the US population during the first decade of the 21st century. Numbers of visible third molars, prevalent in young adults, decreased progressively through each successive age cohort. Demographic differences exist for prevalence of third molars in the US population.

Special Contribution: Third Molar Clinical Trials Annotated Bibliography.

PURPOSE: To provide clinicians with an annotated bibliography of published articles from research funded externally by the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Foundation, spanning 1996 to 2015, addressing the topic of third molar management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A brief summary for each article was generated by the respective authors. RESULTS: The complete annotated bibliography generated by the authors is included in the Appendix. CONCLUSION: The annotated bibliography provides clinicians and other interested individuals with a summary of current literature emanating from clinical studies on third molar topics.

Combined surgical-orthodontic treatment: how did it evolve and what are the best practices now?

It has been 50 years since the landmark presentation by Hugo Obwegeser at Walter Reed Army Hospital. At that conference, Professor Obwegeser offered American surgeons techniques to correct facial skeletal deformities with access through intraoral incisions. As important advances in surgical technique and anesthesia evolved for the surgical procedures, a major contribution by American orthodontists in collaboration with surgeons was the creation of a common diagnostic, planning, and treatment scheme for use by both clinician groups in the treatment of dentofacial deformities, the skeletal and dental problems of the most severely affected 5% of the population. This article summarizes what American orthodontists and surgeons have learned in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, and forecasts what might be the future of treatment for patients with dentofacial deformities.

Pain with pericoronitis affects quality of life.

PURPOSE: To assess the association between patients' pericoronitis pain symptoms and quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes for lifestyle and oral function. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subjects (American Society of Anesthesiologists health risk assessment level I or II) with mild symptoms of pericoronitis were enrolled in a study approved by the institutional review board and asked to complete a QOL instrument specifically for third molar problems covering lifestyle, oral function, and pain. Subjects assessed lifestyle and oral function using a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from "no trouble" (score, 1) to "lots of trouble" (score, 5), and worst and average pain using a 7-point Likert-type scale, ranging from "no pain" (score, 1) to "worst pain imaginable" (score, 7). Pain levels reported at enrollment were compared with QOL outcomes for lifestyle and oral function using Spearman correlation coefficients. Correlations of at least 0.6 were considered clinically quite important, and correlations of at least 0.4 were considered clinically important. Associations between these outcome measurements were considered statistically significant at a P value less than .05. RESULTS: Most of the 113 subjects were Caucasian (51%), women (56%), 23 years old or younger (58%), and well educated (91% with at least some college). Mean pain levels ± standard deviation were low (worst pain, 3.3 ± 1.5; average pain, 2.4 ± 1.2). All pain outcomes were significantly associated with items in the lifestyle and oral function domains (P < .01). Clinically important correlations were seen between pain outcomes and daily routine, social life, eating a regular diet, chewing food, and talking (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important correlations existed between subjects' pericoronitis pain and lifestyle and oral function, associations not often considered by clinicians or policy makers.

Monitoring for periodontal inflammatory disease in the third molar region.

PURPOSE: To assess changes at 2-year intervals in the periodontal status of the third molar region in participants enrolled with asymptomatic third molars and no clinical evidence of third molar region periodontal pathology. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: The included participants who presented with a healthy periodontal status (all probing depths [PDs], <4 mm) in the third molar region, defined as distal of second molars and around adjacent third molars, were from a larger longitudinal study of participants with asymptomatic third molars. Full-mouth periodontal PD data from 6 sites per tooth were obtained clinically at enrollment and at subsequent 2-year intervals. Data were aggregated to the patient level. Outcome variables were the presence or absence of periodontal pathology, defined as at least 1 PD of at least 4 mm in the third molar region. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine participants had a third molar region PD shallower than 4 mm at enrollment. Most participants were Caucasian (85%), women (60%), younger than 25 years (62%), educated beyond high school (84%), and with good oral health habits. At 6 years, excluding the 61 participants lost to follow-up, 47% participants had had third molars removed, 21% had developed at least 1 PD of at least 4 mm in the third molar region since enrollment, and 32% retained the periodontal status at enrollment (all PDs in third molar region, <4 mm). Demographic characteristics were not statistically different for participants followed for 6 years compared with those lost to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although not all participants could be followed for 6 years after enrollment or chose to retain third molars, one third of participants maintained the third molar region periodontal status assessed at baseline for 6 years after enrollment; no clinical evidence of pathology developed over time.

Effect of quality of life measures on the decision to remove third molars in subjects with mild pericoronitis symptoms.

PURPOSE: To assess how quality of life (QoL) measures affect the decision for third molar (3M) removal in patients with mild symptoms of pericoronitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Healthy subjects, aged 18 to 35 years, with mild symptoms of pericoronitis were enrolled in an institutional review board-approved study. The demographic, clinical, and QoL data were collected at enrollment. The subjects voluntarily scheduled surgery for 3M removal. The principal outcome variable was their decision to undergo or not undergo surgery within 6 months of enrollment. The possible predictor variables in a multivariate logistic regression analysis were the demographic characteristics, dental insurance, and QoL measures. RESULTS: The mean age of the 113 subjects was 23.2 ± 3.8 years. Of the 113 subjects, 79 elected to undergo 3M removal within 6 months of enrollment (removed group) and 34 elected to retain their 3M at 6 months after enrollment (retained group). A significantly greater proportion of the removed group were white (58% vs 35%; P = .03) and reported having at least "a little trouble" with opening their mouths (38% vs 18%; P = .04) and taking part in social life (27% vs 6%; P = .01). The multivariate logistic regression model suggested the odds of electing 3M removal within 6 months of enrollment were greater for those who were white (odds ratio [OR] 2.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14 to 6.32) and those who had at least "a little trouble" with interactions in their social life (OR 3.22, 95% CI 1.08 to 9.58). CONCLUSIONS: In subjects with mild pericoronitis symptoms, experiencing problems with oral function and lifestyle, factors not often considered by clinicians, were significantly associated with subjects' decision for early 3M removal.

Removal of symptomatic third molars may improve periodontal status of remaining dentition.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of third molar removal on the periodontal status of adjacent second molars and teeth more anterior in the mouth in patients with mild symptoms of pericoronitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Healthy patients with mild symptoms of pericoronitis affecting at least 1 mandibular third molar were recruited for a study approved by the institutional review board. The subset analyzed in this study had all 4 third molars removed. Data were collected at enrollment and at least 3 months after surgery. Full-mouth periodontal probing was conducted at 6 sites per tooth. A probing depth of at least 4 mm (PD4+) was considered an indicator for periodontal pathology. The presence of a PD4+ on the distal of second molars (D2Ms) or anterior to the D2Ms, the number of PD4+s, and extent scores (percentage of PD4+s of all possible probing sites) were assessed at the patient and jaw levels. The association between patients' pre- and postsurgical periodontal status was assessed using the McNemar exact test. The level of significance was set at .05. RESULTS: The median age of the 69 patients was 21.8 years (interquartile range, 20.2 to 25.2 yr). Forty-five percent were men, and 57% were Caucasian. Significantly more patients (88%) had at least 1 D2M PD4+ at enrollment compared with after surgery (46%; P < .01). D2M extent scores decreased from 31.5 at enrollment to 11 after surgery. Significantly more patients (61%) had at least 1 PD4+ anterior to the D2M at enrollment compared with after surgery (29%; P < .01). Extent scores anterior to the D2M decreased from 2.0 at enrollment to 0.6 after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Removal of third molars in patients with mild pericoronitis symptoms improved the periodontal status of the D2Ms and teeth more anterior in the mouth.

The presence of visible third molars negatively influences periodontal outcomes in the Maternal Oral Therapy to Reduce Obstetric Risk study.

PURPOSE: To assess the relationship between the presence or absence of visible third molars and outcomes for periodontal inflammatory disease. METHODS: Obstetric subjects, at enrollment in an institutional review board-approved, multisite study, Maternal Oral Therapy to Reduce Obstetric Risk (N = 1,798), were divided into 2 groups, those with no visible third molars (n = 692) and those with at least 1 visible third molar (n = 1,106), the predictor variables for this study. The principal outcome variables were the patient-level periodontal status of the first/second molars: mean periodontal probing depths, mean attachment levels, and mean extent scores. Periodontal disease severity also was assessed by criteria from the Oral Conditions and Pregnancy trial and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/American Academy of Periodontology. Outcomes according to the presence or absence of third molars were compared with χ(2) statistics and multivariable analyses. Significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: Significantly more subjects had at least 1 third molar (62%) as compared with subjects with no visible third molar (38%) (P < .01). Ethnic characteristics of the 2 groups were similar. Overall, more subjects were white (61%), with most identifying their ethnicity as Latino. African-American subjects were well represented (37%). Subjects with a visible third molar were more likely to be significantly older, to be receiving medical assistance, and to have used tobacco before pregnancy. If subjects had at least 1 visible third molar, the mean first/second molar probing depths, attachment levels, and scores for bleeding on probing were significantly greater even after adjustment for covariates. On the basis of either Oral Conditions and Pregnancy criteria or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/American Academy of Periodontology criteria, subjects were significantly more likely to have moderate or severe periodontal disease if a third molar was detected. CONCLUSION: If at least 1 visible third molar was detected in subjects in the Maternal Oral Therapy to Reduce Obstetric Risk study at enrollment as compared with no detected third molars, periodontal outcomes were significantly worse.

Mechanical debridement of subgingival biofilm in participants with asymptomatic third molars does not reduce deeper probing depths in the molar regions of the mouth.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of mechanical debridement of subgingival biofilm on periodontal outcomes in adolescents and young adults with asymptomatic third molars. METHODS: Healthy participants with 4 asymptomatic third molars were enrolled in an institutional review board-approved longitudinal study. Clinical data were collected at enrollment and at follow-up visits. Full-mouth periodontal probing, 6 sites per tooth, was assessed as a measure of clinical periodontal status. At enrollment, all participants had dental prophylaxis after data collection, which included removal of subgingival biofilm; this was repeated annually. The primary outcome measures were the comparison from baseline to follow-up 2 years after enrollment of participants' periodontal probing depths for third molars and first/second molars. In addition, a comparison of extent scores at baseline to follow-up 2 years after enrollment for periodontal probing sites of at least 4 mm was performed for the same molar regions of the mouth. Changes over time in clinical periodontal status from enrollment to the follow-up at least 2 years later were analyzed with Mantel-Haenszel row mean score statistics. The level of significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: The median follow-up from entry to the study was 2.2 years (interquartile range, 2.0-2.8 years) for 262 participants who averaged 27.7 years of age (SD, 1.2 years); 53% were female participants, and 81% were white. Most participants (90%) were educated beyond high school. On the basis of periodontal probing depths, participants' clinical periodontal status did not differ from enrollment to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Dental prophylaxis at yearly intervals in participants with asymptomatic third molars, which included mechanical removal of subgingival biofilm, had minimal or no impact on reducing deeper probing depths, clinical indicators of periodontal pathology in young adults.

The association between orthodontic treatment with removal of premolars and the angulation of developing mandibular third molars over time.

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in mandibular third molar angulation during orthodontic treatment in subjects having either first or second premolars or neither removed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective study approved by the institutional review board, right and left mandibular third molar angulations were compared to the vertical axis of adjacent second molars before and at the end of orthodontic treatment. The sample included 25 subjects with first premolars removed, 25 subjects with second premolars removed, and 24 subjects with no premolars removed. A decrease in angulation over time of at least 5°, so that the third molar became more vertical, was considered clinically favorable. Data were assessed by a linear mixed effect model and a proportional odds model with significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: Prior to treatment, the average mandibular third molar angulation did not differ significantly among the three study groups (P  =  .97). The average change during treatment was not significantly affected by group (P  =  .59), but a higher proportion of mandibular third molars were more vertical by at least 5° in the second premolar extraction group compared to the other two groups at the completion of treatment. CONCLUSION: Although creating space for third molars to erupt and function has intuitive appeal, clinicians should not assume that third molars will move upright to a vertical position even if premolar removal is performed as part of an orthodontic treatment plan.

Quality of life outcomes after third molar removal in subjects with minor symptoms of pericoronitis.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to assess the effect of third molar removal on the quality of life in subjects with symptoms of pericoronitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Healthy subjects (American Society of Anesthesiologists Classes I and II), aged 18 to 35 years, with minor symptoms of pericoronitis affecting at least 1 mandibular third molar were recruited for an institutional review board-approved study. The exclusion criteria were major symptoms of pericoronitis, generalized periodontal disease, body mass index greater than 29 kg/m(2), and antibiotic or tobacco use. The data from patients undergoing surgery to remove all third molars with a follow-up examination after surgery at least 3 months later were included in these analyses. The clinical, demographic, and quality of life data were collected at enrollment and after surgery. At entry, the debris was removed from symptomatic third molar sites; no attempt was made to mechanically remove nonsheddable biofilm. The patients scheduled surgery electively with a recall examination at least 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: The median age of the 60 subjects was 21.9 years (interquartile range 20.2 to 24.7). The median postoperative follow-up was 7.7 months (interquartile range 6.0 to 12.4). The proportion of patients reporting the worst pain as severe decreased from enrollment to after surgery from 32% to 3%. Those responding "none" for the worst pain increased from 10% to 78%. Fifteen percent of subjects reported the pain intensity as "nothing," "faint," or "very weak" at enrollment. This increased to 96% after surgery. One third of patients reported the unpleasantness of pain as "neutral," "slightly unpleasant," or "slightly annoying" at enrollment, which increased to 97% after surgery. Also, 22% and 18% of the patients reported "quite a bit" or "lots of difficulty" with eating desired foods and chewing foods at enrollment, respectively; only 1 patient reported this degree of difficulty at the follow-up examination. In contrast, 42% and 37% of the patients reported no difficulty with eating and chewing at enrollment, which had increased to 95% and 93% at the follow-up examination, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Removal of the third molars positively influenced the quality of life outcomes in those with minor symptoms of pericoronitis.

What are the local and systemic implications of third molar retention?

PURPOSE: To establish a relationship between visible third molars (M3s) and increased periodontal probing depths on teeth other than M3s and to examine the hypothesis that the presence of M3s and/or increased probing depths and local inflammation associated with M3s was associated with increased levels of serum inflammatory markers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data from three previous population studies (Dental Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities [DARIC], Oral Conditions and Pregnancy [OCAP], and National Health and Nutrition Estimates Study [NHANES III]) and the third molar clinical trials of young adults (White et al) are summarized. A secondary analysis determined whether the presence or absence of visible M3s was associated with an increased prevalence of clinical signs of periodontal disease using adjusted logistic regression models. In addition, serum samples collected from the OCAP, DARIC, and White studies were used to measure the markers of systemic inflammation, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and soluble intracellular adhesion molecule-1. RESULTS: In young adults, asymptomatic M3s were associated with an increase in periodontal probing depths of at least 4 mm on second molars and an increase in probing depth of at least 2 mm in 24% of subjects after 2 years. Retention of asymptomatic M3s for 6 years led to a significant increase in the number of subjects with a probing depth of 4 mm or more in non-M3 regions of the mouth. Findings from the DARIC, OCAP, and NHANES III further confirmed the association between the M3 probing depth and periodontal inflammation on non-M3s. Retention of M3s in the presence of periodontal inflammation was associated with significant increases in the serum interleukin-6, soluble intracellular adhesion molecule-1, and C-reactive protein levels. CONCLUSION: Patients deciding to retain M3s should consider the potential long-term effects on their periodontal status and the potential for the retained M3s to serve as a chronic source of inflammation that stresses their systemic health.