Abstract
This work systematically reviews dental implant placement through impacted teeth or
residual roots, as an alternative to invasive extraction surgeries, evaluated in terms
of survival rates, marginal bone loss, surgical, and prosthetic complications. The
authors conducted an electronic search of four databases up to September 2020; also
a complementary handsearch was carried out. The quality of the included studies was
assessed using a protocol for assessment of risk of bias in exposure studies. Ten
studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were analysed. A total of 44 patients
received 62 dental implants and were monitored for a minimum of 12-months follow-up.
An overall mean implant survival rate was 90.32%, reporting 97.56 % for dental implants
through impacted teeth and 76.19% through residual roots. No surgical or prosthetic
complications were reported. Placing dental implants through impacted teeth may offer
a valid therapeutic option for implant-supported restorations in patients for whom
surgery and orthodontic traction are not possible, and/or patients who refuse to undergo
more invasive extraction surgery. Moreover, additional caution is recommended when
placing implants through retained root fragments, as this may involve long-term risk.
Further research generating long-term data are needed to confirm these findings.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Clinical evaluation of freeze-dried cancellous block allografts for ridge augmentation and implant placem Comparison of survival and complicatient in the maxilla.Implant Dent. 2010; 19: 272-279
- Success rate and duration of orthodontic treatment for adult patients with palatally impacted maxillary canines.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124: 509-514
- Immediate loading of implants inserted through impacted teeth in the esthetic area: a series of 10 cases with up to 7 years of follow-up.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2019; 39: 325-332
- Evaluation of surgical-orthodontic treatments on impacted mandibular canines.Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011; 16: 925-928
- Computer-guided implant placement for rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with two impacted canines: an approach without extraction of the impacted teeth.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2015; 35: 93-97
- Dentointegration of a titanium implant: a case report.Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 17: 235-241
- Formation of a periodontal ligament around titanium implants.J Periodontol. 1990; 61: 597-601
- The interface between retained roots and dental implants: a histologic study in baboons.J Periodontol. 2004; 75: 1102-1106
- New formation of periodontal tissues around titanium implants in a novel dentin chamber model.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16: 259-267
- Supracrestal circular collagen fiber network around osseointegratednonsubmerged titanium implants.Clin Oral Implants Res. 1992; 3: 169-175
- On the repair potential of periodontal tissues.J Periodontol. 1976; 47: 256-260
- Unconventional implant treatment: I. implant placement in contact with ankylosed root fragments. A series of five case reports.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20: 851-856
- Unconventional implant placement. 2: placement of implants through impacted teeth. Three case reports.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2009; 29: 405-413
- Unconventional implant placement. V: implant placement through impacted teeth; results from 10 cases with an 8- to 1-year follow-up.Int Orthod. 2015; 13: 164-180
- Unconventional implant placement IV. Implant placement through impacted teeth to avoid invasive surgery. Long-term results of 3 cases.Open Dent J. 2015; 9: 15-20
- Unconventional implant placement part iii: implant placement encroaching upon residual roots — a report of six cases.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17 (Article in English/French): e396-e405
- Implants in contact with tissues other than bone. Is there room for a potential paradigm shift?.Swiss Dent J. 2014; 124 (Article in French/German): 149-164
- The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62: e1-e34
- Chapter 7: Systematic reviews of etiology and risk.in: Aromataris E. Munn Z. Joanna Briggs Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The Joanna Briggs Institute, 2017 (Available from URL: https://reviewersmanual.joannabriggs.org (last accessed 27 August 2021))
- Late dental implant failures associated with retained root fragments: case reports with histologic and SEM analysis.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2018; 38: 9-15
- Placing dental implants through impacted teeth to support a fixed partial denture in a geriatric patient as an alternative to invasive extraction surgeries.Eur J Dent. 2020; 14: 697-701
- Unintentional root fragment retention in proximity to dental implants: a series of six human case reports.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2015; 35: 305-313
- Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23: 2-21
- Comparison of survival and complication rates of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and implant-supported FDPs and single crowns (SCs).Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18 (published correction appears in Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:326-328): 97-113
- Oral health care: more than caries and periodontal disease. A survey of epidemiological studies on oral disease.Int Dent J. 1986; 36: 207-214
- Immediate implants after the removal of maxillary impacted canines: a clinical series of nine patients.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009; 24: 348-352
- Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants.Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997; 8: 161-172
- The use of reduced healing times on ITI implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: early results from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002; 13: 144-153
- Success criteria in implant dentistry: a systematic review.J Dent Res. 2012; 91: 242-248
- Long-term evaluation of submerged and nonsubmerged ITI solid-screw titanium implants: a 10-year life table analysis of 468 implants.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003; 18: 826-834
- Long-term evaluation of Astra Tech and Brånemark implants in patients treated with full-arch bridges. Results after 12-15 years.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 1144-1151
- The socket-shield technique: a proof-of-principle report.J Clin Periodontol. 2010; 37: 855-862
- Proximal socket shield for interimplant papilla preservation in the esthetic zone.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013; 33: e24-e31
Article info
Publication history
Published online: January 07, 2021
Accepted:
December 31,
2020
Identification
Copyright
© 2021 The British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
