Outcomes of autotransplanted teeth with complete root formation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Wen Chen Chung, Yu Kang Tu, Yi Hung Lin, Hsein Kun Lu

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

134 Scopus citations

Abstract

Aim In this review, we assessed clinical outcomes of autotransplanted teeth with complete root formation and the effects of various influencing factors. Materials and Methods Pubmed, Scopus, Google scholar and a hand search were used to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case series till February 2013. Using multilevel Poisson regression, the annual failure rate (FR), 1-year and 5-year survival rates (SRs), infection-related root resorption rate (RR), ankylosis rate (AR), the influences of systemic antibiotics (SAs), endodontic and splinting modalities and donor tooth morphology were analysed. Failure was defined as a transplant being lost during follow-up. Results Twenty-six studies were included. The estimated FR, RR, AR, 1- and 5-year SRs were 2.0%, 2.1%, 1.2%, 98.0% and 90.5%, respectively. The estimated FR was higher in the absence of SA, suture splinting, wire splinting ≤14 days and posterior donors. The estimated RR was higher in the absence of SA, endodontic treatment within post-operative 14 days and anterior/premolar donors. The estimated AR was higher with wire splinting and premolar donors. Conclusions Tooth autotransplantation with complete root formation is a favourable treatment with rare FR, RR and AR. However, SAs, endodontic and splinting modalities and tooth morphology seemed to influence the outcomes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)412-423
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Clinical Periodontology
Volume41
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 04 2014
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • complete root formation
  • meta-analysis
  • survival
  • systematic review
  • tooth autotransplantation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Outcomes of autotransplanted teeth with complete root formation: A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this