I am a general dentist who treats a lot of children. I wanted to share a serendipitous experience with JADA’s readers and relate how timely The Journal can be. Usually I am rushing to get to work but, on this particular morning, I had a few extra minutes and was able to glance at my April JADA before leaving. I found the article by Dr. Paul Edwards and colleagues, "Extirpation of the Primary Canine Tooth Follicles: A Form of Infant Oral Mutilation" (
JADA 2008;139[4]:442–450[Abstract/Free Full Text]
) disturbing, yet interesting. I made a note to re-read it when I had more time, and brought it with me to my office.
Within two hours of reading the article, a new patient came in to see me, a 3-year-old child who was recently adopted from a rural town in Ethiopia. Before we even sat down for the examination, his adoptive mother said, "He’s missing two teeth, and I would like you to look at this." The teeth missing were the two mandibular primary canines! If I had not seen the JADA article on this particular morning, a presumptive diagnosis of infant oral mutilation would not have been in my differential.
While performing the examition on this child, I was uncertain how I would explain the missing teeth to his mother. She was tearful when I showed her the JADA article, but grateful to have an explanation.
