Mesiodens Removal: Resolving the Early Versus Late Intervention Dilemma.

BACKGROUND

This narrative review examines the surgical timing dilemma for impacted mesiodens removal. Early intervention risks iatrogenic damage to developing tooth structures, while delayed surgery may permit irreversible damage to adjacent permanent teeth including impaired root development and eruption disturbances.

FINDINGS: Current evidence supports early surgical intervention around 6 to 7 years of age. Recent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) studies demonstrate shorter root lengths and delayed formation stages in teeth adjacent to impacted mesiodens. Large-scale studies show tuberculate and germ-type mesiodens and pose highest risk for adjacent tooth damage. Early removal prevents root development impairment and reduces need for complex orthodontic intervention, while delayed removal necessitates secondary procedures and orthodontic traction.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Evidence favors early intervention before this age threshold when benefits of preserving normal root development outweigh surgical risks. Risk-stratified management of mesiodens based on morphology, position, and patient age provides optimal outcomes and reduces treatment complexity.