American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2019
First and second permanent molars with failed or delayed eruption: Clinical and statistical analyses.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
la Monaca Gerardo, Cristalli Maria Paola, Pranno Nicola, Galluccio Gabriella, Annibali Susanna, Pippi Roberto
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this work was to analyze data of patients with failed or delayed eruption of first and second permanent molars, to assess the effectiveness of the treatment methods used.
METHODS: Epidemiologic and clinical data of 125 patients (mean age 14.08 ± 4.04 years) with 197 affected molars (30 first and 167 second molars) were retrospectively analyzed. The treatment outcome was known in 161 molars after patient drop-out (20 patients with 36 molars). The cases were categorized into 8 groups according to the choice of treatment: orthodontic uprighting, surgical-orthodontic uprighting, surgical uprighting, surgical repositioning, surgical exposure, first or second molar extraction, third molar extraction, or removal of pathologic conditions.
RESULTS: The overall treatment outcome was positive in 141 molars (87.6%). It was positive in all cases treated with orthodontic uprighting (7 molars), surgical exposure (10 molars), surgical uprighting (38 molars), and surgical repositioning (8 molars), but it was significantly lower for surgical-orthodontic uprighting (34/48 molars, 70.8%). The positive outcome was significantly lower for inclusion (52/68 molars, 76.5%) than for early-diagnosed condition (11/11 molars, 100%) and retention (78/82 molars, 95.1%), and for total bone crown coverage (21/28 molars, 75.0%) than for osteomucosal or mucosal crown coverage (120/133 molars, 90.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that an early diagnosis results in a better outcome regardless of the treatment used, with the number of cases with a positive outcome being higher in younger patients.
METHODS: Epidemiologic and clinical data of 125 patients (mean age 14.08 ± 4.04 years) with 197 affected molars (30 first and 167 second molars) were retrospectively analyzed. The treatment outcome was known in 161 molars after patient drop-out (20 patients with 36 molars). The cases were categorized into 8 groups according to the choice of treatment: orthodontic uprighting, surgical-orthodontic uprighting, surgical uprighting, surgical repositioning, surgical exposure, first or second molar extraction, third molar extraction, or removal of pathologic conditions.
RESULTS: The overall treatment outcome was positive in 141 molars (87.6%). It was positive in all cases treated with orthodontic uprighting (7 molars), surgical exposure (10 molars), surgical uprighting (38 molars), and surgical repositioning (8 molars), but it was significantly lower for surgical-orthodontic uprighting (34/48 molars, 70.8%). The positive outcome was significantly lower for inclusion (52/68 molars, 76.5%) than for early-diagnosed condition (11/11 molars, 100%) and retention (78/82 molars, 95.1%), and for total bone crown coverage (21/28 molars, 75.0%) than for osteomucosal or mucosal crown coverage (120/133 molars, 90.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that an early diagnosis results in a better outcome regardless of the treatment used, with the number of cases with a positive outcome being higher in younger patients.