Extraction of a maxillary first permanent molar vs Extraction of a mandibular first permanent molar: Spontaneous space closure
- Population
- Children aged 5 to 15 years undergoing first permanent molar extraction
- Intervention
- Extraction of a maxillary first permanent molar
- Comparison
- Extraction of a mandibular first permanent molar
- Outcome
- Spontaneous space closure
Spontaneous post-extraction space closure did not differ significantly between the maxilla and mandible (pooled OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.46 to 9.28; 3 studies; I2 = 72%); ungraded.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Extraction of a maxillary first permanent molar vs Extraction of a mandibular first permanent molar Spontaneous post-extraction space closure · Children aged 5 to 15 years undergoing first permanent molar extraction · Hospital- and clinic-based pediatric dental settings (Sweden, Romania, UK), Maxilla versus mandible (spontaneous space closure) Spontaneous post-extraction space closure did not differ significantly between the maxilla and mandible (pooled OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.46 to 9.28; 3 studies; I2 = 72%); ungraded. Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review. (2018) All outcomes | OR 2.06 [0.46, 9.28] | 3 studies · 107 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consequences of early extraction of compromised first permanent molar: a systematic review. 2018 All outcomes | May 2015 to 2017 (literature from 1960 to 2017) | 19 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Extraction of a maxillary first permanent molar vs Extraction of a mandibular permanent first molar · Children and adolescents after extraction of a mandibular permanent first molar (before… · 1 review
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- The evaluation of spontaneous space closure after the extraction of first permanent molars. · 2013 · included by 1 of these review
- The effect of aqualase and phacoemulsification on the corneal endothelium. · 2010 · included by 1 of these review
- Evaluation of spontaneous space closure and development of permanent dentition after extraction of hypomineralized permanent first molars. · 2007 · included by 1 of these review
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.