↓ Skip to main content

Surgical removal versus retention for the management of asymptomatic impacted wisdom teeth

Overview of attention for article published in this source, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
41 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Surgical removal versus retention for the management of asymptomatic impacted wisdom teeth
Published by
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, June 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003879.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mettes, Theodorus (Dirk) G, Ghaeminia, Hossein, Nienhuijs, Marloes EL, Perry, John, van der Sanden, Wil JM, Plasschaert, Alphons

Abstract

The prophylactic removal of asymptomatic impacted wisdom teeth is defined as the (surgical) removal of wisdom teeth in the absence of local disease. Impacted wisdom teeth may be associated with pathological changes, such as inflammation of the gums around the tooth, root resorption, gum and alveolar bone disease, damage to the adjacent teeth and the development of cysts and tumours. Other reasons to justify prophylactic removal have been to prevent late incisor crowding. When surgical removal is carried out in older patients, following the development of symptoms, the risk of postoperative complications, pain and discomfort increases. Nevertheless, in most developed countries prophylactic removal of trouble-free wisdom teeth, either impacted or fully erupted, has long been considered as 'appropriate care' and is a very common procedure. There is a need to determine whether there is evidence to support this practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 87 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 24%
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Student > Postgraduate 13 14%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Other 23 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 72%
Unspecified 9 10%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 5 6%