Cargando…

A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique

OBJECTIVES: To assess survival rates and frequency of complications for immature and mature autotransplanted teeth after at least 1 year in function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients who had undergone tooth autotransplantation between 2000 and 2018 were invited to a clinical and radio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Raabe, Clemens, Bornstein, Michael M., Ducommun, Julien, Sendi, Pedram, von Arx, Thomas, Janner, Simone F. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8137630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33263141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03673-y
_version_ 1783695651063726080
author Raabe, Clemens
Bornstein, Michael M.
Ducommun, Julien
Sendi, Pedram
von Arx, Thomas
Janner, Simone F. M.
author_facet Raabe, Clemens
Bornstein, Michael M.
Ducommun, Julien
Sendi, Pedram
von Arx, Thomas
Janner, Simone F. M.
author_sort Raabe, Clemens
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To assess survival rates and frequency of complications for immature and mature autotransplanted teeth after at least 1 year in function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients who had undergone tooth autotransplantation between 2000 and 2018 were invited to a clinical and radiographic follow-up examination. First, survival rates were calculated on the basis of a phone inquiry. A clinical follow-up examination allowed for the calculation of the success rate, i.e., absence of any potentially adverse clinical and radiographic findings of the autotransplanted teeth. Moreover, the effect of demographic, dental, and surgical variables on survival/success was analyzed statistically. RESULTS: Thirty-eight teeth in 35 patients were transplanted during the study period. Three teeth in 3 patients were excluded due to missing records. All other patients were successfully contacted and interviewed by phone. Out of these 35 transplants, 32 were still in function, and 3 had been extracted, yielding a 91.4% survival probability after a median follow-up of 3.4 years. Of the 32 teeth qualifying for the success analysis, 20 (62.5%) showed absence of potentially adverse findings, while 3 (9.4%) required root canal treatment (RCT). Out of the 9 mature, root-end resected transplants, 4 exhibited ongoing pulp canal obliteration, all with a single root canal. Postoperative and potentially adverse findings or failures were found more frequently in the group of mature transplants (55.6%) than immature transplants (30.4%) and for molars (72.7%) than premolars (17.6%) or canines (25%). None of the potential predictors had a statistically significant effect on survival or success. CONCLUSION: Autotransplanted teeth yielded a satisfying midterm survival rate regardless of their stage of development. An additional, extraoral root-end resection of mature transplants may lead to rates of revascularization and postoperative pulp canal obliteration higher than the data reported on unmodified mature transplants. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Extraoral root-end resection of mature teeth shows promising outcomes for transplants especially with a single root canal and uncomplicated root morphology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8137630
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81376302021-06-03 A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique Raabe, Clemens Bornstein, Michael M. Ducommun, Julien Sendi, Pedram von Arx, Thomas Janner, Simone F. M. Clin Oral Investig Original Article OBJECTIVES: To assess survival rates and frequency of complications for immature and mature autotransplanted teeth after at least 1 year in function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients who had undergone tooth autotransplantation between 2000 and 2018 were invited to a clinical and radiographic follow-up examination. First, survival rates were calculated on the basis of a phone inquiry. A clinical follow-up examination allowed for the calculation of the success rate, i.e., absence of any potentially adverse clinical and radiographic findings of the autotransplanted teeth. Moreover, the effect of demographic, dental, and surgical variables on survival/success was analyzed statistically. RESULTS: Thirty-eight teeth in 35 patients were transplanted during the study period. Three teeth in 3 patients were excluded due to missing records. All other patients were successfully contacted and interviewed by phone. Out of these 35 transplants, 32 were still in function, and 3 had been extracted, yielding a 91.4% survival probability after a median follow-up of 3.4 years. Of the 32 teeth qualifying for the success analysis, 20 (62.5%) showed absence of potentially adverse findings, while 3 (9.4%) required root canal treatment (RCT). Out of the 9 mature, root-end resected transplants, 4 exhibited ongoing pulp canal obliteration, all with a single root canal. Postoperative and potentially adverse findings or failures were found more frequently in the group of mature transplants (55.6%) than immature transplants (30.4%) and for molars (72.7%) than premolars (17.6%) or canines (25%). None of the potential predictors had a statistically significant effect on survival or success. CONCLUSION: Autotransplanted teeth yielded a satisfying midterm survival rate regardless of their stage of development. An additional, extraoral root-end resection of mature transplants may lead to rates of revascularization and postoperative pulp canal obliteration higher than the data reported on unmodified mature transplants. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Extraoral root-end resection of mature teeth shows promising outcomes for transplants especially with a single root canal and uncomplicated root morphology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-12-02 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8137630/ /pubmed/33263141 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03673-y Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Raabe, Clemens
Bornstein, Michael M.
Ducommun, Julien
Sendi, Pedram
von Arx, Thomas
Janner, Simone F. M.
A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique
title A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique
title_full A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique
title_fullStr A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique
title_full_unstemmed A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique
title_short A retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique
title_sort retrospective analysis of autotransplanted teeth including an evaluation of a novel surgical technique
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8137630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33263141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03673-y
work_keys_str_mv AT raabeclemens aretrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT bornsteinmichaelm aretrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT ducommunjulien aretrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT sendipedram aretrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT vonarxthomas aretrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT jannersimonefm aretrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT raabeclemens retrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT bornsteinmichaelm retrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT ducommunjulien retrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT sendipedram retrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT vonarxthomas retrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique
AT jannersimonefm retrospectiveanalysisofautotransplantedteethincludinganevaluationofanovelsurgicaltechnique