SynthesisClinical oral investigations2020
Is the extraction of third molars a risk factor for the temporomandibular disorders? A systematic review.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- To do or not to do extraction in temporomandibular joint pain: a systematic review background and rationale.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2026Review
- Association Between Impacted Mandibular Third Molars and Temporomandibular Dysfunction: An Analysis Based on the Modified Helkimo Index.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- An integrated approach to tracking mandibular position relative to incisal and condylar envelopes of motion during intraoral clinical procedures: a new look at TMJ movements.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Article
- Temporomandibular Disorders Management-What's New? A Scoping Review.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- Periodontal parameters in orthodontically tractioned teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate through a systematic review the extraction of third molars as a risk factor for temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: Randomized and nonrandomized controlled clinical trials where patients underwent third molar extraction and with qualitative evaluation of TMDs before and after extraction were included.
resultsAfter applying the inclusion criteria, seven nonrandomized clinical studies were included. QUIPS tool showed that four articles presented a moderate and three a high risk of bias (RoB). Six studies reported that TMDs presented higher level after removal of third molars ranging from OR, 1.81 to 2.15/RR, 2.1. However, one study showed no significant association. GRADE showed heterogeneity in relation to general results, which means that confidence in the estimated effects varied from low to moderate GRADE. The quality of clinical recommendations decreased especially due to the risk of bias in some of the included studies evaluated with the QUIPS tool. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Third molar extraction can be associated with the development of TMD signs and symptoms. Furthermore, TMD can be aggravated according to the third molar location, the degree of impaction and surgical difficulty, age, and gender. This systematic review highlights the need to perform randomized clinical trials with diagnostic criteria and standardized surgical procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.