ArticleHead & face medicine2023
Comparative treatment outcomes after bilateral extractions of maxillary second molars or first premolars in patients with class II malocclusion: a retrospective study.
Article in Head & face medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic extraction of second molars in orthodontics: a scoping review.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Second Versus First Molar Extractions in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Treatment: A Retrospective Longitudinal Outcome Study into Maxillary Canine, Premolar, and Molar Movement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis retrospective cohort study aimed to compare treatment results between bilateral extraction of upper second molars (M2) and first premolars (P1) in terms of treatment timing, cephalometry, upper third molar alignment and relapse in the long-term.
methodsFifty-three consecutively treated Caucasian patients with a brachyfacial pattern, skeletal class I and dental class II requiring extraction in the maxilla due to crowding were retrospectively divided into group I (M2 extracted; N = 31) and II (P1 extracted; N = 22). Fixed appliances were inserted after extraction and after distalisation of the first molars in group I. Post-treatment lateral cephalograms were digitally analysed and compared between groups. Six to seven years later relapse and success of upper third molar alignment were clinically evaluated as well as orthodontic treatment duration, pre-treatment age and gender recorded.
resultsAfter debonding patients with second molar extraction showed significantly smaller values for the Wits-appraisal, but higher values for index and facial axis. Extracting first premolars caused significantly more retroinclination/-position of anterior teeth and an increased profile concavity, more relapse and less successful alignment of upper third molars. Orthodontic treatment duration, pre-treatment age and gender were not significantly different between groups.
conclusionsBilateral extraction of upper first premolars or second molars may solve dental crowding in skeletal class I dental class II patients with a brachyfacial growth pattern. Upper second molar extraction seems to affect maxillary third molar alignment, long-term stability and dental and soft-tissue cephalometric parameters positively, but no intervention proved to be clearly superior.
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.