3. Outcomes and prognostic factors that influence the
success of tooth auto transplantation in children
and adolescents
4. • Study Design: Retrospective study
• Study population: Paediartic population less than 15 years.
Aim: To investigate the outcomes and prognostic factors that affect the
success of autotransplantataion
5. • Study Sample: 75 patients and 89 transplanted teeth
• Clinical Outcomes: PDL Healing, Pulp healing
• Radiographic : PDL Healing Pulp Healing, Peri radicualr Region
6. Criteria for the final Outcome :
• Success: Teeth with immature root formation that had pulp
revascularization following transplantation.
• Successful endodontic treatment performed (with absence of periapical
pathosis) in teeth with necrotic immature teeth and in teeth with complete
root development in which the pulp was electively removed following
transplantation.
• Favourable periodontal healing with either no evidence of ex- ternal root
resorption or where the resorption was effectively treated and controlled
with endodontic treatment.
7. • Survival:
Replacement resorption (ankylosis), unfavorable PDL healing with the tooth
still present in its transplanted position at final follow-up visit
• Prognostic Variables:
Donor Tooth type, Eruption status, Stage of root and apex development.
Recipient Site & Surgery
Position of the recipient site, Alveolar bone status, Surgical
difficulty & Ease of placement, Method of stabilization, Endodontic
treatment, Cause of tooth loss
8. Conclusion:
• Tooth transplantation carried out in children and adolescents demon-
strated high success and survival, with the stage of root
development influencing both the pulp and PDL healing of the
transplanted teeth.
• Overall success of tooth transplantation was 87.6%, and the survival
rate was 94.4%
10. Aim: Rapid prototyping (RP)‐assisted auto transplantation shortens
the extra‐alveolar time and enables a superior clinical outcome.
Methods:
Retrospective Cohort study
Two Treatment groups. 1. Conventional Autotransplantation, 13 people
2. Rapid Prototyping assisted Autotransplantation, 21 people
11.
12. • Clinical Outcomes:
Age, Gender, Extra alveolar time, Fixation. Method, RCT treatment
Results: The RCT rates of the conventional group and RP group were
92.3% and 59%, respectively.
13. CONCLUSION
• Rapid prototyping (RP)‐assisted autotransplantation shortens the
extra‐alveolar time and enables a superior clinical outcome. However,
no cohort studies of the application of this method on adult
populations have been reported.
14. Auto transplantation: a viable
treatment option for adolescent
patients with significantly
compromised teeth
Australian Dental Journal;2016