Trial reportEuropean journal of orthodontics2025
Dentoalveolar changes following extraction of mandibular primary second molars in patients with congenitally missing second premolars-a longitudinal randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in European journal of orthodontics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly management of congenitally missing mandibular second premolars may influence craniofacial growth, yet the long-term effects of extracting the primary second molars remain unclear.
objectivesTo evaluate the skeletal and dental effects of extracting mandibular primary second molars in patients with congenitally missing mandibular second premolars and to compare with historical control data. TRIAL
designProspective, randomized longitudinal split-mouth trial. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis longitudinal study is based on 40 patients (aged 9-12 years) with bilateral agenesis of mandibular second premolars, who were randomly assigned to either extraction or hemisection of the primary second molar. Randomization to determine the side and order of extraction or hemisection was performed using an online tool, with allocation concealment ensured by sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes prepared in advance by the author responsible for treatment assignment, who was not involved in patient care. The present study examines the overall treatment effect, regardless of the method applied in the split-mouth design. Cephalometric analyses were performed at baseline (T1) and after 4 years (T2). Dental casts were evaluated at T2 to measure residual space. A control group of 29 untreated individuals with normal occlusion was included for comparison. All measurements were conducted by an independent examiner blinded to the treatment assignment.
resultsIn the extraction group both the maxilla and the mandible exhibited forward growth (P < .05), while only minor changes were detected in the control group. Extraction caused significant retroclination of the lower incisors by 4.5° (P < .01) and retrusion by 1.8 mm (P < .01), leading to an increased overjet of 1.2 mm (P < .05) and overbite of 1.5 mm (P < .05). Compared with controls, dental changes were significantly greater in the extraction group (P < .05). Residual space after extraction showed no significant correlation with cephalometric changes.
conclusionExtraction of mandibular primary second molars in cases of agenesis induces favourable dental changes without detrimental skeletal effects. This approach may be a viable option in selected patients, although caution is recommended for those with deep bite tendencies.
trial registrationThe trial was registered with https://www.researchweb.org/, registration number: 967125.
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.