ArticleBMC oral health2025
Decoding the dental and skeletal factors behind mandibular second molar impaction: a retrospective cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the etiology behind the failure of second molars to erupt has not been fully elucidated, several contributing factors have been suggested. Even though a considerable number of studies have been published on second molar impaction, only a limited number have examined the influence of mandibular skeletal characteristics via panoramic and cephalometric radiographs. This study aimed to evaluate the relationships between the impaction of mandibular second molars (MM2) and various skeletal and dentoalveolar morphological parameters.
methodsIn this retrospective study, panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs of individuals aged 11–18 years were examined. Measurements of the study group (SG), consisting of individuals with impacted MM2, and the control group (CG), consisting of individuals with normally erupted MM2, were compared. Subgroups were formed on the basis of skeletal classifications. The primary evaluation parameters included the GoGn/SN angle, gonial angle, molar inclination angle, and ratio of MM1-ramus distance to MM2 mesiodistal crown width. A significance level of p < 0.05 was adopted for all the statistical analyses.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference in the GoGn/SN angle between the SG and CG. Within the study group, a significant difference in gonial angle was observed only among Class II individuals, where a decreased angle was associated with a more horizontal mandibular growth pattern. The molar inclination angle increased particularly in Class III individuals with impacted teeth, suggesting that increased mesial tipping may play a role in impaction. The most prominent finding was a significantly lower MM1-ramus distance to MM2 crown width ratio in the SG across all skeletal classes.
conclusionsMM2 impaction appears to be a multifactorial predominantly associated with local morphological limitations. Posterior space deficiency and increased mesial inclination were identified as major contributing risk factors. This study highlights the clinical value of early assessment of molar angulation and posterior space availability in preventing MM2 through appropriate orthodontic and surgical planning.
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.