J.K.
answers from
Phoenix
on
.
-
Q&A
Get advice from millions of moms -
Timeline
See what’s coming up for your child
Alright, Mamas. This is a LONG shot, but I need some advice. (I should say right up front, I've already been to one regular dentists, and two specialists, and gotten different opinions from all of them.)
So. At my most recent dental check up, the dentist informed me that I have a resorption lesion. (That means that my body is eating one of my teeth, in this case my far back molar on one side, from the inside out.) Since there's no way to tell how fast it's spreading, there's no way to know how long it will be until the tooth is completely hollow and just cracks off.
My dentist told me to get a root canal and no crown - I wouldn't need it. Then, in a few years, the tooth would need to be pulled.
The first specialist told me to get a root canal, and that a crown was a necessity. There would be no further decay after that.
The seconds specialist told me that the tooth was too far gone. I COULD do a root canal, but it would NEED a crown (that's two votes for crown, if anyone is keeping track) but that there wouldn't be enough tooth left to hold onto a crown, so it would have to be pulled in any case.
So. What would you do? Get the root canal? Pull the tooth? And if you pull it, would you replace the tooth? (It's a far back molar, and my teeth don't match up straight, so there shouldn't be an issue with the teeth shifting.) Argh. Any experience here would be GREAT.
.
I would have to tooth pulled and be done. I would also ask what caused this resorbtion so you can perhaps avoid it in the future. If you were pulling a tooth that is between others you need to make sure the remaining teeth do not "fall over" into the gap and become crooked, but with a last molar that is not a problem. Save the money, get rid of the tooth.
If it was me I would get the tooth pulled there is no reason to go to all that expense if you are going to eventually have it pulled. I don't think you will need to replace it unless it just gives you a lot of problems. Usually one molar missing is not a big deal.
Good luck and God Bless!
Hi M.-
I am in NO way a dentist...however my father (god rest him) had dental concerns later in life.
One reason over the years to have him 'save' a molar...was that if things went bad for 'other' teeth...that molar could be used as an anchor to support other dental things (dentures etc)...
So...it might be worth a consult...with a dentist familiar with 'longer term' issues.
Best Luck!
michele/cat
I'd get the tooth pulled and be done with it. Many many many people have teeth pulled and are no worse off for it.
The same thing happened to my husband. The dentist said--and research I've done confirms--that reabsorption is just something the body does once in a while--on its own--and there is no way to do anything to prevent it from happening. Just because it happened once DOES NOT mean it will happen again.
My husband had the reabsorbed tooth pulled about a year ago. He had no root canal done--didn't need it. We're trying to decide what to have done--if anything. The cost to have a permanent implant/crown put in (titanium) is over $2000, probably closer to $3000. To have a bridge put in means sawing off half of the two teeth next to the hole and then putting in a fake tooth bridge "anchored" by the two teeth on each side. Close to $2000. Or just leaving it alone and having a hole in the mouth.
Which is what he's sort of leaning for--leaving the hole alone--except now the dentist and the specialist are filling his head with all sorts of stories about how the teeth on either side are going to "fall in" to the hole and the teeth on top are going to "move down" into the hole, etc., etc. We don't know what is correct and what is hyped for everyone to "make money." This is NOT a simple or inexpensive fix. And to make matters worse, my husband suffers from OCD and does NOT need to have to think about these "dire" predictions.
Anyone have any information on whether or not the teeth are going to "move" around like the dentist and specialist are saying, I'd really like to know; please send me a post. He's 41 years old, so yeah, technically, he still has half his life yet that it would be nice to have a tooth. However, his mouth should have had surgery to fix a jaw issue and braces when he was a teenager, and he didn't get either. His mouthful of teeth is uneven and a mess the way it is, and breaking/chipping teeth has been a regular occurrence in his life, since his teeth were never aligned right to begin with (his parents couldn't afford the surgery and braces for both boys, so the younger one got them because his bite was worse).
I did not have a resorption lesion, but I did need a root canal. I opted for the inexpensive way out and got it pulled (no root canal needed). It was the tooth furthest back. Having the tooth replaced is expensive, anywhere from $2-$4k or something crazy like that, so I'm not going to. I don't miss it. My boss said he's had all his back molars pulled out (in addition to his wisdom teeth). Doesn't seem to bother him either.
I've always been told that a root canal weakens the tooth, so to get O. and NOT do a crown is a waste of money. So, I vote root canal and crown OR just get it pulled. Pulling might be quicker, cheaper and make the most sense since it's the far-back molar--you won't miss it.
Pull it. If you had that kind of problem in your toe they would amputate.
I've had two root canals, and I can't imagine having a root canal with no crown. There's a gaping hole in the tooth! And since the tooth won't be strong enough to hold a crown, I say just have it pulled. It's probably the cheapest option anyway.
my dentist noticed resorption on 2 of my teeth at least 4 years ago. i have never had any pain or discomfort from the teeth, so rather than moving forward with lots of procedures i can't afford, i am waiting till it becomes a problem.
