Factors associated with spontaneous mesialization of impacted mandibular third molars after second molar protraction

Protraction of Mandibular Second Molar for Substitution of Adjacent Missing First Molar With a Mini-Implant-Anchored Albert Loop Appliance

Protraction of mandibular posterior teeth into edentulous regions is challenging in clinical practice. This case demonstrated a minor tooth movement of a mandibular second molar to substitute its adjacent missing first molar in a 15-year-old female. An efficient bodily movement of the mandibular second molar was achieved through a mini-implant-anchored protraction loop appliance. With this carefully designed biomechanical system, over 10-mm molar protraction was accomplished within 14 months without mesial or lingual tipping. The adjacent third molar erupted spontaneously during the protraction process and drafted mesially. Through brackets and segmented archwire after the protraction, the second and third molars were successfully protracted and good buccal interdigitation was achieved. The combination of the Albert protraction loop and mini-implant allows for more efficient protraction of the mandibular molars, avoiding mesial tipping and lingual rotation of the molars.

Orthodontic treatment of substituting third molars for missing permanent molars

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the orthodontic effect and efficiency of substituting third molars for missing first or second permanent molars systematically.

METHODS

Forty-six patients (69 third molars total) with missing permanent molars replaced by third molars were selected. The angulation, crown-to-root ratio, and periodontal condition of the third molars before and after treatment were compared. The American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System was used to evaluate the alignment and occlusion of third molars after treatment. The duration of orthodontic treatment and third molar replacement therapy were also recorded.

RESULTS

The average orthodontic treatment time was 33.9 ± 5.6 months, and the average angulation change of third molars during treatment was 49.8 ± 29.8°. The average height of mesial alveolar bone increased by 4.8 ± 0.5 mm in patients whose third molars were mesially inclined or horizontally impacted. The root length of adult patients decreased by 0.72 ± 0.02 mm on average, and the average gingival recession was 0.10 mm, both of which were not statistically significant. The average score for each third molar evaluated by the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System was 1.8 ± 0.5 points.

CONCLUSIONS

If the indications and timing of treatment were well-controlled, third molars would be excellent substitutes for missing first or second permanent molars through the orthodontic method.

Alveolar bone changes after molar protraction in young adults with missing mandibular second premolars or first molars

OBJECTIVES

To assess the changes in alveolar bone of the mandibular second molars following molar protraction and investigate the factors associated with the alveolar bone changes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cone-beam computed tomography of 29 patients (mean age 22.0 ± 4.2 years) who had missing mandibular premolars or first molars and underwent molar protraction were reviewed. Alveolar bone level was measured as the distance from the cementoenamel junction at six points, buccal, lingual, mesiobuccal (MB), mesiolingual (ML), distobuccal (DB), and distolingual (DL), of the second molars at pretreatment (T0) and after molar protraction (T1). Factors associated with alveolar bone changes at the distal and mesial of the second molars were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean alveolar bone changes ranged from -1.2 mm (bone apposition) to 0.8 mm (bone resorption). The presence of a third molar impaction at T0 (P < .001), third molar angulation at T0 (P < .001), and Nolla's stage of third molar at T0 (P = .005) were significantly associated with alveolar bone level changes distal to the second molars. Treatment duration (P = .028) was significantly associated with alveolar bone level changes mesial to the second molar.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with impacted third molars, third molars at an earlier stage of development, and mesially angulated third molars at pretreatment may have less alveolar bone resorption distal to the second molars following protraction. Patients with increased treatment time may have reduced alveolar bone resorption mesial to the second molars.

The effects of a corticotomy on space closure by molar protraction using TSADs in patients with missing mandibular first molars

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of a triangular-shaped corticotomy on the protraction of second and third molars in patients with missing mandibular first molars.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The corticotomy and non-corticotomy groups consisted of sixteen first molars in fifteen patients (28.6 ± 9.4 years) and nineteen first molars in fifteen patients (26.6 ± 8.4 years), respectively. A triangular-shaped corticotomy was performed between the second premolar and molar. Temporary skeletal anchorage devices (TSADs) were placed between the first and second premolars in both groups. Mandibular dentition variables were measured on the pre and post-treatment panoramic radiographs and lateral cephalograms. Analysis of covariance was performed.

RESULTS

The corticotomy group exhibited 2.8 mm more inter-radicular correction between the second molar to second premolar roots (P < .001) and 1.6 mm more inter-radicular distance correction between the third molar to second premolar roots compared to the non-corticotomy group (P < .01). The corticotomy group required 5.5 months less treatment time for space closure (P < .05), but the total treatment time was the same for both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The inter-radicular distance between the mandibular second premolar and molar and treatment times for space closure was significantly reduced in the corticotomy group.

Factors associated with the maxillary third molar position after total arch distalization using a modified C-palatal plate in adolescents

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term position of erupted third molars after maxillary total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plates (MCPPs) in adolescents and to identify factors associated with these positions.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION

Sixty-two third molars (male: 20, female: 42) in Class II patients treated with MCPPs and thirty-nine teeth for the Control group (male: 22, female: 17).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Samples were analyzed using panoramic radiographs taken initially (T0), after treatment (T1) and after >3 years retention (T2). Third molars were classified as downward (Group A, N = 31; males: 12, females: 19) and upward (Group B, N = 31; males: 8, females: 23) based on their vertical position after treatment. Analysis of variance and multiple logistic regression analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The vertical position of the third molars of Group A, Group B, and the Control showed a 2.2, 3.5 and 2.7 mm downward movement at T2. However, there was no difference in the amount of third molar eruption among the groups. Regarding factors affecting the vertical distance of the third molar, Age, C8-OP, ∠8-OP and D7-T at the initial affected vertical position of the third molars after molar distalization (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Group A and B showed no difference in the third molar eruption during retention after total arch distalization. This study suggests that it might be unnecessary to extract the developing third molar before molar distalization in Class II adolescents.