Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Tooth autotransplantation (TAT) offers a viable biological approach to tooth replacement in children and adolescents. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of the cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT)–guided TAT compared to the conventional TAT protocol and to assess the 3-dimensional (3D) patterns of healing after CBCT-guided TAT (secondary aim). This study included 100 autotransplanted teeth in 88 patients. Each experimental group consisted of 50 transplants in 44 patients (31 males and 19 females). The mean (SD) age at the time of surgery was 10.7 (1.1) y for the CBCT-guided group. This was 10.6 (1.3) y for the conventional group. The mean (SD) follow-up period was 4.5 (3.1) y (range, 1.1 to 10.4 y). Overall survival rate for the CBCT-guided TAT was 92% with a success rate of 86% compared to an 84% survival rate and a 78% success rate for the conventional group (P > 0.005). The following measurements were extracted from the 3D analysis: root hard tissue volume (RV), root length (RL), apical foramen area (AFA), and mean and maximum dentin wall thickness (DWT). Overall, the mean (SD) percentage of tissue change was as follows: RV gain by 65.8% (34.6%), RL gain by 37.3% (31.5%), AFA reduction by 91.1% (14.9%), mean DWT increase by 107.9% (67.7%), and maximum DWT increase by 26.5% (40.1%). Principal component analysis (PCA) identified the mean DWT, RV, and maximum DWT as the parameters best describing the tissue change after TAT. Cluster analysis applied to the variables chosen by the PCA classified the CBCT group into 4 distinct clusters (C1 = 37.2%, C2 = 17.1%, C3 = 28.6%, C4 = 17.1%), revealing different patterns of tissue healing after TAT. The CBCT-guided approach increased the predictability of the treatment. The 3D analysis provided insights into the patterns of healing. CBCT-guided TAT could be adopted as an alternative for the conventional approach. (Clinical trial center and ethical board University Hospitals, KU Leuven: S55287; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02464202)

Keywords

CAD computed tomography digital imaging/radiology tooth regeneration/transplantation periodontal ligament (PDL)clinical outcomes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Akhlef

Schwartz

Andreasen

Jensen

. 2018. Autotransplantation of teeth to the anterior maxilla: a systematic review of survival and success, aesthetic presentation and patient-reported outcome. Dent Traumatol. 34(1):20–27.

Andreasen

Paulsen

Ahlquist

Bayer

Schwartz

1990. A long-term study of 370 autotransplanted premolars: Part I. Surgical procedures and standardized techniques for monitoring healing. Eur J Orthod. 12(1):3–13.

Andreasen

Paulsen

Bayer

1990. A long-term study of 370 autotransplanted premolars: Part IV. Root development subsequent to transplantation. Eur J Orthod. 12(1):38–50.

Andreasen

Paulsen

Bayer

Schwartz

1990. A long-term study of 370 autotransplanted premolars. Part ii. Tooth survival and pulp healing subsequent to transplantation. Eur J Orthod. 12(1):14–24.

Andreasen

Paulsen

Schwartz

1990. A long-term study of 370 autotransplanted premolars. Part iii. Periodontal healing subsequent to transplantation. Eur J Orthod. 12(1):25–37.

Barrett

Mortensen

. 1997. Interactive live-wire boundary extraction. MedImage Anal. 1(4):331–341.

Becker

Wilmes

Grandjean

Vasudavan

Drescher

2018. Skeletally anchored mesialization of molars using digitized casts and two surface-matching approaches: analysis of treatment effects. J Orofac Orthop. 79(1):11–18.

Czochrowska

Stenvik

Album

Zachrisson

. 2000. Autotransplantation of premolars to replace maxillary incisors: a comparison with natural incisors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 118(6):592–600.

Czochrowska

Stenvik

Bjercke

Zachrisson

. 2002. Outcome of tooth transplantation: survival and success rates 17–41 years posttreatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 121(2):110–119.

10.

Denys

Shahbazian

Jacobs

Laenen

Wyatt

Vinckier

Willems

2013. Importance of root development in autotransplantations: a retrospective study of 137 teeth with a follow-up period varying from 1 week to 14 years. Eur J Orthod. 35(5):680–688.

11.

EzEldeen

Stratis

Coucke

Codari

Politis

Jacobs

2017. As low dose as sufficient quality: optimization of cone-beam computed tomographic scanning protocol for tooth autotransplantation planning and follow-up in children. J Endod. 43(2):210–217.

12.

EzEldeen

Van Gorp

Van Dessel

Vandermeulen

Jacobs

2015. 3-Dimensional analysis of regenerative endodontic treatment outcome. J Endod. 41(3):317–324.

13.

Heckel

Konrad

Karl Hahn

Peitgen

H-O.

2011. Interactive 3D medical image segmentation with energy-minimizing implicit functions. Comp Graph. 35(2):275–287.

14.

Hilkens

Bronckaers

Ratajczak

Gervois

Wolfs

Lambrichts

2017. The angiogenic potential of DPSCs and SCAPs in an in vivo model of dental pulp regeneration. Stem Cells Int. 2017:2582080.

15.

Jang

Choi

Lee

Roh

Park

Kim

2016. Prognostic factors for clinical outcomes in autotransplantation of teeth with complete root formation: survival analysis for up to 12 years. J Endod. 42(2):198–205.

16.

Kafourou

Tong

Day

Houghton

Spencer

Duggal

2017. Outcomes and prognostic factors that influence the success of tooth autotransplantation in children and adolescents. Dent Traumatol. 33(5):393–399.

17.

Kallu

Vinckier

Politis

Mwalili

Willems

2005. Tooth transplantations: a descriptive retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 34(7):745–755.

18.

Kanavakis

Ludwig

Rosa

Zachrisson

Hourfar

2014. Clinical outcomes of cases with missing lateral incisors treated with the ‘t’-mesialslider. J Orthod. 41(Suppl 1):S33–S38.

19.

Keightley

Cross

McKerlie

Brocklebank

2010. Autotransplantation of an immature premolar, with the aid of cone beam CT and computer-aided prototyping: a case report. Dent Traumatol. 26(2):195–199.

20.

Lambrichts

Driesen

Dillen

Gervois

Ratajczak

Vangansewinkel

Wolfs

Bronckaers

Hilkens

2017. Dental pulp stem cells: their potential in reinnervation and angiogenesis by using scaffolds. J Endod. 43(9S):S12–S16.

21.

Loubele

Bogaerts

Van

Pauwels

Vanheusden

Suetens

Marchal

Sanderink

Jacobs

2009. Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol. 71(3):461–468.

22.

Maes

Collignon

Vandermeulen

Marchal

Suetens

1997. Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 16(2):187–198.

23.

Meschi

EzEldeen

Torres Garcia

Jacobs

Lambrechts

2018. A retrospective case series in regenerative endodontics: trend analysis based on clinical evaluation and 2- and 3-dimensional radiology. J Endod. 44(10):1517–1525.

24.

Obregon

Vaquette

Ivanovski

Hutmacher

Bertassoni

. 2015. Three-dimensional bioprinting for regenerative dentistry and craniofacial tissue engineering. J Dent Res. 94(9, Suppl):143S–152S.

25.

Paulsen

Andreasen

Schwartz

2006. Tooth loss treatment in the anterior region: autotransplantation of premolars and cryopreservation. World J Orthod. 7(1):27–34.

26.

Petti

Glendor

Andersson

2018. World traumatic dental injury prevalence and incidence, a meta-analysis-one billion living people have had traumatic dental injuries. Dent Traumatol. 34(2):71–86.

27.

Shahbazian

Jacobs

Wyatt

Denys

Lambrichts

Vinckier

Willems

2013. Validation of the cone beam computed tomography–based stereolithographic surgical guide aiding autotransplantation of teeth: clinical case-control study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 115(5):667–675.

28.

Shahbazian

Jacobs

Wyatt

Willems

Pattijn

Dhoore

Van Lierde

Vinckier

2010. Accuracy and surgical feasibility of a CBCT-based stereolithographic surgical guide aiding autotransplantation of teeth: in vitro validation. J Oral Rehabil. 37(11):854–859.

29.

Sharma

Vargervik

2006. Using implants for the growing child. J Calif Dent Assoc. 34(9):719–724.

30.

Smith

Angstadt

Monteiro

Zhang

Khademhosseini

Yelick

. 2018. Bioengineered tooth buds exhibit features of natural tooth buds. J Dent Res. 97(10):1144–1151.

31.

Tsukiboshi

. 2002. Autotransplantation of teeth: requirements for predictable success. Dent Traumatol. 18(4):157–180.

32.

Wei

Song

Ding

Liu

Fan

Zhang

Shi

Wang

2013. Functional tooth restoration by allogeneic mesenchymal stem cell–based bio-root regeneration in swine. Stem Cells Dev. 22(12):1752–1762.

33.

Zachrisson

Stenvik

Haanaes

. 2004. Management of missing maxillary anterior teeth with emphasis on autotransplantation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 126(3):284–288.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.26 MB

Use of CBCT Guidance for Tooth Autotransplantation in Children

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material