Space changes after premature loss of mandibular second primary molars: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BMC Oral HealthOct 30, 2026 (epub)
Clinical ResearchPediatricsOpen access

Ahmed Kamal El-Motayam, Yousra Mohamed Abdel Rehim, Mais Medhat Sadek et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed space changes after premature extraction of mandibular second primary molars in children aged 4–9 years. Four studies contributed to the qualitative review, and three studies involving 38 children were pooled. Mean mandibular space loss increased over follow-up, reaching 1.24 mm at 9–10 months post-extraction (95% CI: -1.48 to -1.02; p < 0.0001). The authors note that the evidence is limited and short term; whether this loss leads to later malocclusion or orthodontic treatment need is unknown.

Key findings

  • Mean mandibular space loss was 0.80 mm at 3 months (95% CI: -1.00 to -0.60; p < 0.0001).
  • Mean mandibular space loss was 1.10 mm at 6 months (95% CI: -1.24 to -0.96; p < 0.0001).
  • At 9–10 months, mean mandibular space loss was 1.24 mm (95% CI: -1.48 to -1.02; p < 0.0001).
  • Arch hemi-perimeter decreased by 1.06 mm at 6 months (95% CI: -1.26 to -0.31; p = 0.001).

Why it matters

The findings quantify short-term mandibular space changes after premature loss of a second primary molar, an outcome relevant to developing dentition. However, the review does not establish whether the measured loss predicts later malocclusion or orthodontic treatment. Recognising this uncertainty helps distinguish evidence of short-term dimensional change from evidence of long-term clinical consequences.

What to keep in mind

The evidence is limited: only three studies involving 38 children contributed to the meta-analysis, and follow-up was short. The review reports insufficient evidence for conclusions about the maxillary arch or long-term malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need.

Source

Published in BMC Oral Health. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Pediatrics

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.