Survival and Success of Autotransplantation Maxillary Canine with Closed Apex: Systematic Review

Bouchghel, Lamia; Khamlich, Kenza; Bourzgui, Farid; Quars, Farid El

doi:10.4236/oalib.1108417

Cited by 2 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…15,16 The final search yielded one more SR, resulting in a total of 17 SRs. 2,4,6,7,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] These comprised 10 SRs with meta-analysis and seven without. Fifteen SRs 2,4,6,7,17,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]28,29 were published in international peer reviewed journals while two were Master's Thesis dissertations.…”

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,4,6,7,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] These comprised 10 SRs with meta-analysis and seven without. Fifteen SRs 2,4,6,7,17,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]28,29 were published in international peer reviewed journals while two were Master's Thesis dissertations. 18,27 Sixteen SRs were published in the English language, 2,4,6,7,17,19-29 while one was published in Portuguese.…”

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 The publication years of the primary articles included in the SRs ranged from 1968 to 2021, with six SRs limiting their search to 1990 onwards. [17][18][19]23,26,27 Seven SRs restricted the language of publication to English, 2,7,22,24,25,27,28 one SR restricted articles to English and Spanish, 26 one SR restricted to English and Portugese, 18 and one SR restricted to English, Spanish and Portugese, 17 with the remaining seven placing no restrictions. 4,6,[19][20][21]23,29 The authors of 12 SRs declared no conflict of interest, and of the four SRs which did not declare, 18,20,25,27 two were theses.…”

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[17][18][19]23,26,27 Seven SRs restricted the language of publication to English, 2,7,22,24,25,27,28 one SR restricted articles to English and Spanish, 26 one SR restricted to English and Portugese, 18 and one SR restricted to English, Spanish and Portugese, 17 with the remaining seven placing no restrictions. 4,6,[19][20][21]23,29 The authors of 12 SRs declared no conflict of interest, and of the four SRs which did not declare, 18,20,25,27 two were theses. 18,27 One SR reported that the authors had received grants but did not specify if there was competing interest related to the SR. 17 Six SRs reported on funding, with one being funded by a dental association, 28 two from the authors' institutions, 7,29 and three were self-funded/ received no external funding.…”

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Tooth autotransplantation: An umbrella review

Tan

Tong

Narashimhan

et al. 2023

Dental Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tooth autotransplantation is a versatile procedure with several clinical applications among patients across different age groups. The success of this procedure depends on multiple factors. Despite the wealth of studies available, no single primary study or systematic review is able to report on every factor affecting the outcomes of autotransplantation. The aims of this umbrella review were to evaluate treatmentrelated and patient-related outcomes of autotransplantation and to assess the pre-, peri-or post-operative factors that could affect these. An umbrella review was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. A literature search of five databases was performed up to 25 September 2022. Systematic Reviews (SR) with and without meta-analysis evaluating autotransplantation were included. Calibration among reviewers was carried out prior to study selection, data extraction and Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment. Study overlap was calculated using corrected covered area. Meta-metaanalysis (MMA) was performed for suitable SRs. The AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. Seventeen SRs met the inclusion criteria. Only two SRs were suitable for conduct of MMA on autotransplantation of open apex teeth. The 5-year and 10-year survival rates were >95%. A narrative summary on factors that could affect autotransplantation outcomes and comparisons of autotransplantation to other treatment options were reported. Five SRs were rated as 'low quality' and 12 SRs were rated as 'critically low quality' in the AMSTAR 2 RoB assessment. In order to facilitate a more homogenous pool of data for subsequent meta-analysis, an Autotransplantation Outcome Index was also proposed to standardise the definition of outcomes. Autotransplantation of teeth with open apices have a high survival rate. Future studies should standardise the reporting of clinical and radiographic findings, as well as the definition of outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Re Sultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Tooth autotransplantation: An umbrella review

Tan

Tong

Narashimhan

et al. 2023

Dental Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…in dentistry, and a number of clinical and experimental studies published over the past 40 years, it has been proven that tooth autotransplantation procedure can be clinically predictable with successful results in the long-term perspective [22][23][24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tooth autotransplantation: review of the relevant procedural aspects for the clinical success

Heranin

2022

UDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Tooth autotransplantation may be considered as valuable treatment option to overcome adverse effects of tooth loss and prevent implant-related complications. The essence of such manipulation based on removing targeted (donor) tooth from its present location with its further placement at some other tooth position within the oral cavity of the same patient in the least traumatic way. Objective. To systematize and analyze relevant procedural aspects of tooth autotransplantation associated with its’ clinical success. Materials and Methods. A comprehensive search strategy was realized through databases PubMed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and Cochrane Library (https://www.cochranelibrary.com/), and also via Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com/) search engine to expand possibilities for targeted publications identification. Primary extraction of the targeted studies was provided by their title and abstract. The criteria for eligibility included publications with described original practical and theoretical aspects regarding tooth autotransplantation procedure, while publications with repetitive information or non-sufficiently argumented/non evidence based statements were excluded from further analysis. Results. The final number of eligible studies for analysis was 82 publications with adequate reporting of outcomes associated with present research objective. Out of this number 8 were presented in the form of systematic reviews, 3 in the form of literature reviews, while all others were presented in forms of case reports, case series, protocols, recommendations, follow-ups, experimental and clinical studies. Conclusion. Correct surgical manipulations, which should be as atraumatic as possible to preserve the periodontal ligament of the transplanted tooth, is a key of autotransplantation successful outcome. The success of the treatment is also related with the stage of root development. In cases of transplanting the teeth with complete root development endodontic treatment should be performed approximately in 2 weeks after primary intervention.

show abstract

Survival and Success of Autotransplantation Maxillary Canine with Closed Apex: Systematic Review

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Tooth autotransplantation: An umbrella review

Tooth autotransplantation: An umbrella review

Tooth autotransplantation: review of the relevant procedural aspects for the clinical success

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About