Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23878556›Full record

ArticleDental research journal2013

Tooth auto-transplantation as an alternative treatment option: A literature review.

Tatjana Nimčenko, Gražvydas Omerca, Vaidas Varinauskas, Ennio Bramanti, Fabrizio Signorino, Marco Cicciù

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dental research journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tatjana NimčenkoDepartment of Maxillofacial Surgery, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Lithuania.
Gražvydas Omerca
Vaidas Varinauskas
Ennio Bramanti
Fabrizio Signorino
Marco Cicciù
Lithuanian University of Health Sciences · LT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapidly evolving implantation and alveolar ridge reconstruction techniques created a new area in modern dentistry where tooth loss is no longer a problem. Endless variations of implant's length, diameter, surface, and design along with autogenous, alogenous, aloplastic, or xenogenous bone substitutes made it possible to recreate physiological occlusion, esthetic and masticatory function. However, none of nowadays technologies in implant dentistry have the potential to adapt to a growth and development changes of a child's jaw. Therefore, patient's young age is a restriction for implantation and a particular challenge for a dentist willing to restore missing tooth. Thus, tooth auto-transplantation can be a good choice for treatment. The objective of this review is to underline the biologic principles required for successful auto-transplantation of teeth. Limits, indications, technique, and prognosis will be analyzed.

Indexed as

Autologousauto-transplantationtooth transplantation

Identifiers

PMID23878556
PMCPMC3714809
OpenAlexW206371975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.