Beyond Endodontic MicroSurgery 1: Intentional Replantation
- 1 Downloads
Purpose of Review
The goal of this paper is to explain the concepts and techniques of intentional replantation so as to encourage all practitioners to include this procedure in their armamentarium. We will seek to answer why this procedure is not done more frequently.
The latest review of papers from the 1960s through 2017 shows a success rate approaching 89%.
Other than newer root-end filling materials and transport media, the technique has not varied significantly. The CBCT has allowed for better imaging to help treatment plan the direction of extraction without fracturing the tooth. Future research may show easier ways or tools to more predictably remove a tooth atraumatically.
KeywordsIntentional replantation Schumacher forceps Hanks balanced solution Pedialyte Bioceramic putty CBCT
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The author declares that he has no conflicts of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 1.Setzer, et al. Outcome of endodontic surgery: a meta-analysis of the literature. Joe. 2010.Google Scholar
- 2.Jin, et al. Buccal plate thickness of the Asian people. JOE. 2005.Google Scholar
- 3.Andreason. Relationship between cell damage in the periodontal ligament after replantation and subsequent development of root resorption : a time related study in monkeys. Acta Odontol Scand. 1981.Google Scholar
- 4.Wong et al. Evaluation of tooth holding solutions on extraoral tooth replantation success in dogs; Masters Thesis University PA. 1997,Google Scholar
- 5.Trope, Friedman. Periodontal healing of replanted dog teeth stored in Viaspan, milk and Hank’s balanced salt solution. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1992.Google Scholar
- 8.Grossman. Replantation of teeth: a clinical evaluation. JADA. 1966.Google Scholar
- 9.• Torebinejad. Survival of intentionally replanted teeth and implant-supported single crowns: A Systematic review. J Endo. 2015;41:992–8 The importance of this article was that it was a meta-analysis of articles from 1960 to 2015 and was a direct comparison between replantations versus single tooth implants.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.•• Mainkar A. A systematic review of the survival of teeth intentionally replanted with a modern technique and cost-effectiveness compared with single-tooth implants. J Endod. 2017;43:1963–8 The importance of this article was its conclusions that replantations were more cost-effective than implants and that they should always be discussed as an option, because if the replantation doesn’t work, then one could still get an implant. CrossRefGoogle Scholar