ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2025
Management of an infectious complication appearing in a transcanine implant: a case report.
Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMaxillary canine impaction is the second most common dental eruption anomaly, affecting approximately 0.2-3% of individuals, with a higher incidence in females. This condition often results in complications such as the misalignment of adjacent teeth, root resorption, and the development of cystic lesions. In some cases, abstention is recommended for impacted canine is kept with the lacteal tooth held on the dental arch. But in the longer term an implant therapy is nevertheless indicated. CASE PRESENTATION: A 42-year-old man presented with persistent swelling and pain in the maxillary region associated with a transcanine implant placed one year ago by his dental practitioner. Imaging assessment showed the implant's apex inserted into the impacted canine which presented a crown and root resorption and was associated to a radiolucency around. In order to preserve implant and reduce morbidity related to a full extraction of the tooth, a coronectomy was performed allowing inflammatory surrounding tissues curettage. DISCUSSION: This case shows an infectious complication of a transcanine implant and demonstrates an approach for managing these complications while preserving this implant. The coronectomy is a less invasive technique that reduces potential surgical complications and supports healing. A 2-year follow-up revealed complete bone reossification reinforcing the effectiveness of this method in similar clinical scenarios.
conclusionThis case suggests that coronectomy may be a viable option for managing impacted canines in proximity to implants when complete extraction poses a high risk of complications. However, given the limited number of reported cases and the absence of long-term data, this approach should be considered with caution. Further studies are necessary to better define the indications, long-term outcomes, and potential risks of this technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.