Question · asked by 1 review
Unilateral extraction of the mandibular first permanent molar vs Bilateral extraction of the mandibular first permanent molars: Midline deviation of the mandibular arch
- Population
- Children and adolescents after extraction of a mandibular permanent first molar (before eruption of the second molar)
- Intervention
- Unilateral extraction of the mandibular first permanent molar
- Comparison
- Bilateral extraction of the mandibular first permanent molars
- Outcome
- Midline deviation of the mandibular arch
One study found midline deviation more likely after unilateral than bilateral extraction (OR 11.6; single study; not GRADE-rated).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Unilateral extraction of the mandibular first permanent molar vs Bilateral extraction of the mandibular first permanent molars Midline deviation of the mandibular arch · Children and adolescents after extraction of a mandibular permanent first molar (before eruption of the second molar) · Until eruption of the permanent second molar (median follow-up 4.0 years), University clinics and hospitals in 8 countries (children/adolescents <18 years), Mandible One study found midline deviation more likely after unilateral than bilateral extraction (OR 11.6; single study; not GRADE-rated). Spontaneous space closure after extraction of permanent first molars in children and adolescents: a… (2024) All outcomes | OR 11.6 [1.9, 70.3] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spontaneous space closure after extraction of permanent first molars in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2024 All outcomes | February 2024 | 18 | Not applicable |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.