Extraction Of Upper Premolars Research Articles

Does Upper Premolar Extraction Affect the Changes of Pharyngeal Airway Volume After Bimaxillary Surgery in Skeletal Class III Patients?

The purpose of this study was to assess the pharyngeal airway volume change after bimaxillary surgery in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion and evaluate the difference in postoperative pharyngeal airway space between upper premolar extraction cases and nonextraction cases. Cone-beam computed tomographic scans were obtained for 23 patients (13 in extraction group and 10 in nonextraction group) who were diagnosed with mandibular prognathism before surgery (T0) and then 2 months (T2) and 6 months after surgery (T3). Using InVivoDental 3-dimensional imaging software, volumetric changes in the pharyngeal airway space were assessed at T0, T2, and T3. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to determine whether there were significant changes in pharyngeal airway volume between time points. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to determine whether there were significant differences in volumetric changes between the extraction and nonextraction groups. Volumes in all subsections of the pharyngeal airway were decreased (P < .05) except for changes in the oropharyngeal airway volume in the nonextraction group from T0 to T2. There were significant differences between the extraction and nonextraction groups in the changes of oro- and total pharyngeal airway volumes from T0 to T3. The null hypothesis was rejected. The extraction of upper premolars rather than nonextraction decreased the pharyngeal airway space more in patients with mandibular prognathism who planned to have bimaxillary surgery.

A comparison of anaesthetic area, pain on injection and adverse effect of lidocaine, mepivacaine and articaine with epinephrine for upper premolar extraction

Background and Objectives: A comparative study was made of the anaesthetic area, pain on injection and adverse effect of 2% lidocaine, 2% mepivacaine and 4% articaine, all with epinephrine 1:100,000, in local infiltration during the extraction of upper premolars.

The rationale of maxillary premolar extraction only in Class II therapy

A review of diagnosis for Class II, Division 1 malocclusion has been undertaken. One of the Class II types—maxillary dental protrusion in patients 12 years of age or older—was singled out for study. Inherent was a mandibular arch well positioned and exhibiting little or no arch-length discrepancy. The rationale for treatment of this and other types of Class II malocclusion by extraction of upper premolars was discussed. Finally, the entire philosophy of changes occurring in the facial profile during treatment was re-evaluated.