Patient-reported outcomes and procedural differences between dental implants and tooth autotransplantation

Česká verze

Authors: J. Marton ^1,2*; T. Kovalský ^1,2; Z. Pokorný ^1,2
Authors place of work: Korespondující autor ^*; Klinika zubního lékařství, Lékařská fakulta Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci ¹; Klinika zubního lékařství, Fakultní nemocnice Olomouc ²
Published in the journal: Česká stomatologie / Praktické zubní lékařství, ročník 124, 2024, 4, s. 97-104
Category: Kazuistika
doi: https://doi.org/10.51479/cspzl.2024.005

Summary

Introduction and aim: For tooth loss in adult patients, treatment options include dental implants and autotransplantation of a tooth with complete root formation. This case report presents a patient’s experience undergoing both treatments – one tooth replaced with a dental implant and another with an autotransplanted third molar.

Case description: A 49-year-old patient, concerned about masticatory function loss after the extraction of four teeth on the right side, was referred for evaluation. Examination indicated that tooth 38 required extraction, offering the opportunity to replace tooth 17 with an autotransplanted tooth 28. Tooth 15 was replaced with a dental implant. The transplanted tooth required root canal treatment (RCT) and prosthetic crown modification. Patient-reported outcomes, acquired through a questionnaire, showed satisfaction with both procedures. The autotransplant allowed for a quicker functional recovery but involved more visits due to the necessity of RCT.

Conclusion: Individualized treatment planning must consider patient expectations and primary concerns. Autotransplantation is viable when a suitable donor tooth is available, but one must consider all steps including RCT and potential prosthodontic reconstruction. Dental implants are preferred when bone availability is sufficient.

Keywords:

dental implant, tooth autotransplantation, patient-reported outcomes, tooth replacement

Zdroje

1. Howe MS., Keys W., Richards D. Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: A systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis. J Dent. 2019; 84: 9–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2019.03.008

2. Chung WC., Tu YK., Lin YH., Lu HK. Outcomes of autotransplanted teeth with complete root formation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2014; 41: 412–423. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12228

3. Hua F. Dental patient-reported outcomes update 2021. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2022; 22: 101663. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2021.101663

4. Chanthavisouk P., Pattanaik S., Warren CE., Brickle C., Self K. Dental therapy and dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs). J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2022; 22: 101660. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2021.101660

5. Sischo L., Broder HL. Oral health-related quality of life: what, why, how, and future implications. J Dent Res. 2011; 90:1264–1270. doi: 10.1177/0022034511399918

6. Lin CT., Albertson GA., Schilling LM., Cyran EM., Anderson SN., Ware L., Anderson RJ. Is patients' perception of time spent with the physician a determinant of ambulatory patient satisfaction? Arch Intern Med. 2001; 161: 1437–1442. doi: 10.1001/archinte.161.11.1437

7. Tsukiboshi M., Tsukiboshi C., Levin L. A step-by step guide for autotransplantation of teeth. Dent Traumatol. 2023; 39 Suppl 1: 70–80. doi: 10.1111/edt.12819

8. Rokaya D., Srimaneepong V., Wisitrasameewon W., Humagain M., Thunyakitpisal P. Peri-implantitis update: Risk indicators, diagnosis, and treatment. Eur J Dent. 2020; 14: 672–682. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1715779

9. Cernochova P. Transplantace zubu. Čes. stomatol. Prakt. zub. lék. (Czech Dental Journal). 2009; 109: 4–10.

10. Andreasen JO., Paulsen HU., Yu Z., Bayer T., Schwartz O. A long-term study of 370 autotransplanted premolars. Part II. Tooth survival and pulp healing subsequent to transplantation. Eur J Orthod. 1990; 12: 14–24. doi: 10.1093/ejo/12.1.14

11. Ebenezer V., Balakrishnan K., Asir RV., Sragunar B. Immediate placement of endosseous implants into the extraction sockets. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2015; 7: S234–237. doi: 10.4103/0975-7406.155926

12. Yu H. J., Jia P., Lv Z., Qiu LX. Autotransplantation of third molars with completely formed roots into surgically created sockets and fresh extraction sockets: a 10-year comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 46: 531–538. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2016.12.007

13. Gupta J.. Ali SP. Cone beam computed tomography in oral implants. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 4(I): 2–6. doi: 10.4103/0975-5950.117811

14. Abella F., Ribas F., Roig M., González Sánchez JA., Durán-Sindreu F. Outcome of autotransplantation of mature third molars using 3-dimensional-printed guiding templates and donor tooth replicas. J Endod. 2018; 44: 1567–1574. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.07.007

15. Ashurko I., Vlasova I., Yaremchuk P., Bystrova O. Autotransplantation of teeth as an alternative to dental implantation. BMJ Case Rep. 2020; 13(6); e234889. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2020-234889

16. Tagliatesta L., Guerri F., Moscone S., Jones JM. Autotransplantation of a mature mandibular third molar as alternative to dental implant placement: Case report. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2021; 12: 93–95. doi: 10.4103/njms.NJMS_192_20

17. Kobayashi T., Blatz MB. Autotransplantation: An alternative to dental implants – case report with 4-year follow-up. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2018; 39: 374–381.

18. Terheyden H., Wusthoff F. Occlusal rehabilitation in patients with congenitally missing teeth-dental implants, conventional prosthetics, tooth autotransplants, and preservation of deciduous teeth-a systematic review. Int J Implant Dent. 2015; 1: 30. doi: 10.1186/s40729-015-0025-z

19. Zembic A., Kim S., Zwahlen M., Kelly JR. Systematic review of the survival rate and incidence of biologic, technical, and esthetic complications of single implant abutments supporting fixed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29 Suppl: 99–116. doi: 10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g2.2

20. Esteve-Pardo G., Lozano-Montoya A., Esteve-Colomina L. Dental autotransplantation or immediate single implant for the replacement of a hopeless molar: A comparative case series study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2024; 0: 1–27. doi: 10.11607/prd.5078