2.1
n, number of patients; NR, not reported.
a In some reports, the mean age is not given, so the peak decade is included.
b Includes three cases on first or second molars.
c Total cases reviewed, n for each parameter varies.
Table 4.3 Mandibular buccal bifurcation cysts. Age, sex, and site distribution from selected reports, and from the review of 110 cases by Philipsen et al. (2004 ) (see text for discussion).
| References | First molars | Second molars | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % Male | % Bilateral | n | Mean age | Age range | n | Mean age | Age range | |
| Vedtofte and Praetorius (1989 ) | 12 | 33.3 | 16.6 | 5 | 8.0 | 7–9 | 7 | 13.3 | 11–15 |
| Wolf and Hietanen (1990 ) | 6 | 16.6 | NR | 3 | 7.3 | 6–9 | 3 | 13.0 | 12–14 |
| Thurnwald et al. (1994 ) | 10 | 70.0 | 40.0 | 10 | 7.7 | 5–9 | – | – | – |
| Pompura et al. (1997 ) | 32 | 43.7 | 37.5 | 32 | 7.5 | 5–11 | – | – | – |
| Philipsen et al. (2004 ) | 110a | 55.2 | 23.9 | 36 | 8.7 | 5–47 | 13 | 17.4 | 10–40 |
n = number of patients; NR, not reported.
a Total cases reviewed, n for each parameter varies.
These data cannot be taken to represent the true prevalence of paradental cysts because many studies were based in surgical units, the criteria for diagnosis are not given, and although most report ‘impacted’ teeth, it is rarely stated whether the tooth is fully unerupted or partially erupted. These studies do, however, suggest that many clinicians may not recognise or diagnose paradental cysts.
There is some evidence that many clinicians and pathologists in the United States may not recognise the paradental cyst as an entity, but rather regard it as a variant of dentigerous cyst. One of the best and most widely used textbooks on oral and maxillofacial pathology (Neville et al. 2016 ) recognises the buccal bifurcation cyst in children, but is uncertain about the paradental cyst. Its authors agree that the features may be due to chronic pericoronitis, but suggest that most are probably diagnosed as examples of inflamed dentigerous cysts. Two other excellent and widely used textbooks take a similar stance and suggest that the paradental cyst is an inflamed dentigerous cyst that has become buccally or distally displaced, presumably as a result of eruption of the tooth (Woo 2016 ; Regezi et al. 2017 ).
In a study from the United States of 2646 pericoronal lesions associated with impacted teeth, Curran et al. (2002 ) did not identify a single case of paradental cyst. They reported that 67% (1776 lesions) were diagnosed as normal follicular tissue and of the remaining pathologically significant lesions (n = 872), 86.6% (n = 752) were diagnosed as dentigerous cysts. This suggests that in this centre, paradental cysts were not recognised as an entity and were probably diagnosed as dentigerous cysts. The paper was challenged on this issue by Slater (2003 ), who suggested in correspondence that some of the dentigerous cysts diagnosed by Curran et al. (2002 ) may in fact be paradental cysts. It is not stated, however, how many of their impacted teeth were unerupted
