Abstract

AimsThis study was set out to evaluate the relationship between the presence and absence of unerupted mandibular third molar and fracture of mandibular angle/condyle, and to analyse if prophylactic removal of symptom-free unerupted mandibular third molar is beneficial. MethodsHundred patients of mandible fracture were selected randomly irrespective of age, sex, caste, creed and socio-economic status. Data were collected from the patients on the basis of history, clinical examination and radiographs for the following information: age, sex, aetiology of fracture, presence and status of the mandibular third molar and location of mandible fracture. ResultsIn group A (partially/completely unerupted mandibular 3rd molar), the incidence of angle and condylar fracture was 44.44% and 13.33%, respectively, whereas in group B (fully erupted/missing mandibular third molar), the incidence of angle fracture was 14.45% and the incidence of condylar fractures was 31.77%. ConclusionPractice of prophylactic removal of mandibular third molar and resultant strengthening of angle region should be reconsidered, as it increases the risk of fracture at condylar region which is difficult to treat and associated with more morbidity.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call