Don't miss a digital issue! Renew/subscribe for FREE today.
×
Inside Dentistry
May 2015
Volume 11, Issue 5
Peer-Reviewed

A surgical scalpel was used to perform a fiberotomy to minimize damage to the soft-tissue attachment through blunt dissection (Figure 2). Minimal elevator use is recommended with emphasis on not notching or damaging the cementum. Forceps handles were secured gingival to the crown margins but not too deep on the root. The tooth was then removed following expansion of the elevator motion (Figure 3), and the root surface was examined extraorally under high magnification. The tooth was manipulated only by holding the crown (Figure 4); contact with the root surface was minimized. A small granuloma attached to the apex was removed with the aid of cotton pliers. The root surface was kept moist and hydrated throughout the extraoral time with sterile physiologic saline. Once the root surface had been examined under high magnification and root cracks and fractures were ruled out, apiceoctomy was performed using a 1557 SaberCut™ Bur (Brasseler USA, www.brasselerusa.com), and 3 mm from the root end was removed (Figure 5).

Following apicoectomy, a 3-mm deep retropreparation was prepared into the root canal using a surgical-length #2 round bur on a slow-speed handpiece (Figure 6 through Figure 8). It's important to locate and retroprep all portals of exit from the tooth. Multi-rooted teeth may require one or more retropreparations in each root depending on the number of canals. The oval canal's isthmus was also prepared.

Once retropreparation was complete, it was filled using the "Lid Technique,"2 which combines the injection of two bioceramic formulations, the EndoSequence® BC RRM™ (Root Repair Material) (Brasseler USA) with the EndoSequence® Putty Fast Set (Putty-FS). The RRM was injected to the depth of the retropreparation with the aid of a 90º bent acid-etch syringe tip (Ultradent Products, www.ultradent.com) and a thin layer of Putty-FS was placed on the cavosurface margin to seal the RRM (Figure 9 and Figure 10). Excess was removed using a small brush (Figure 11).

After suctioning the developed clot in the alveolar socket, the tooth was replanted back in the socket and the patient was instructed to close on a small piece of gauze between his teeth and to stay closed for 1 hour (Figure 12). This helps develop a new clot that helps stabilize the tooth. The alveolar bone around the tooth was gently squeezed back into position in case it had expanded during the extraction procedure. The total extraoral time of 5 minutes was noted. An immediate post-operative radiograph showed the retrofilling (Figure 13). The 6-month follow up radiographs and clinical pictures showed healing of the periapex and adequate gingival health (Figure 14 and Figure 15). The patient returned for a different dental procedure in a different tooth 6 years later, which allowed an additional recall radiograph to be obtained, confirming long-term healing and stability of the tooth 6 years following intentional replantation (Figure 16).

Discussion

The modern intentional replantation procedure has come a long way and has been shown to have a very good success rate.4 When strict adherence to selection criteria is combined with atraumatic extraction and apicoectomy and retrofill of all portals of exit in extraoral times less than 10 minutes, a predictable outcome can be expected. However, clinicians should focus on trying to save the tooth via less invasive ways such as conventional retreatment or apicoectomy, which have been shown to have a higher success rate, and reserve intentional implantation for when the other two procedures are not possible options. In cases where surgical access to the periapex has a high chance of nerve damage due to anatomical proximity of the inferior alveolar nerve or the mental nerve to a tooth's apex or when the root inclination is too lingual or too far back in the jaw to allow adequate visualization, this procedure can be attempted.

Postoperative care for this procedure is limited to minimizing damage to the alveolar socket and having the patient bite on the tooth until a clot is formed. In author's experience, rigid or physiologic fixation using ligatures or splints is rarely needed. Patients should be instructed to close teeth together if they feel movement of the tooth out of the socket immediately after the procedure and as needed thereafter. Occasionally, a figure 8 suture over the occlusion surface of the tooth or the use of hard periodontal dressing bucco-lingually can help stabilize the tooth temporarily until reattachment is achieved. Guidelines for antibiotic use are currently not clearly defined in the literature; however, since use of antibiotics is recommended following avulsions, it may be prudent to prescribe them in these procedures as well. Follow-up care and visits are recommended at 1, 3, and 6 months following the procedure. If the tooth is excessively loose or shows signs of reinfection during these follow-ups, it should be removed and discarded at once.

Conclusion

Conventional apicoectomy or non-surgical retreatment is always a first choice for cases with persistent periapical symptoms after root canal therapy. However, in some cases, due to anatomical challenges or contraindications for surgery or retreatment, an intentional replantation procedure can be offered as an alternative to full extraction. Case selection is the most important criteria for success; the most significant selection criteria include non-fractured teeth with conical roots, lack of periodontal pathology, and intact, well-sealing coronal restorations. Atraumatic extraction and extraoral times less than 10 minutes will help make intentional replantation a predictable procedure for teeth with persistent periapical symptoms with a history of conventional root canal therapy. The presented case demonstrated long-term retention in the oral cavity. A clinical surgical video of the presented case in this article is available for viewing online.5

About the Author

Allen Ali Nasseh, DDS, MMS
President, RealWorldEndo™
Clinical Instructor, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterial Sciences
Harvard University School of Dental Medicine
Boston, Massachusetts
Private Practice
Boston, Massachusetts

References

1. Salehrabi R, Rotstein I. Endodontic treatment outcomes in a large patient population in the USA: an epidemiological study. J Endod. 2004;30(12):846-850.

2. Nasseh AA, Brave D. Apicoectomy: The misunderstood surgical procedure. Dent Today. 2014;34(2):130-138.

3. Kim S, Pecora G, Rubinstein R. Comparison of traditional and microsurgery in endodontics. In: Kim S, Pecora G, Rubinstein R, eds. Color Atlas of Microsurgery in Endodontics. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders, 2001:5-11.

4. Nimczyk SP. Re-inventing intentional replantation: a modification of the technique. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2001;13(6):433-439.

5. Nasseh AA. CBL#14: Intentional replantation of a mandibular premolar. RealWorldEndo website. https://realworldendo.com/videos/cbl-14-intentional-replantation-of-a-mandibular-premolar. Accessed March 18, 2015.

© 2024 BroadcastMed LLC | Privacy Policy