ArticleFrontiers in oral health2026
A novel full digital workflow for dental autotransplantation: surgical accuracy and clinical outcomes in a prospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dental autotransplantation is a biologically conservative alternative to prosthetic or implant-supported rehabilitation, though achieving predictable outcomes remains challenging. The use of digital workflows integrating CBCT-based planning, 3D modelling, and customized surgical guides may improve surgical precision and reproducibility. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and clinical outcomes of a full-digital workflow for dental autotransplantation. Methods: Patients with a non-restorable tooth and a healthy third molar suitable for donation were included. Preoperative CBCT and intraoral scans were used to enable automatic segmentation, virtual simulation of donor tooth positioning, and planning of alveolar site preparation. Customized, root-based surgical guides were then designed and 3D-printed. The surgical procedure included extraction of the non-restorable tooth, harvesting of the donor third molar, and its transplantation into the prepared alveolar site. The accuracy of the surgical protocol was assessed by superimposing postoperative CBCT-derived 3D models onto the preoperative plan using digital qualitative and quantitative analyses. Clinical outcomes, including tooth stability, periodontal health, and periapical status, were evaluated over an 18-month follow-up period. Results: Ten patients (6 males, 4 females; mean age 27.2 ± 2.77 years) were enrolled. Mean surface deviations between planned and post-operative models were 0.63 ± 0.45 mm (tooth) and 0.17 ± 0.06 mm (alveolar bone). Three-dimensional linear discrepancies averaged 2.04 ± 1.24 mm at the coronal level and 1.36 ± 1.00 mm apically. Angular deviations showed no systematic rotational bias, with limited pitch and roll deviations and higher interindividual variability for yaw. Two teeth required post-surgery endodontic treatment. All transplanted teeth showed clinical stability, physiological probing depths, and absence of pathological mobility. Conclusions: At 18 months, a fully digital workflow with customized surgical guides enabled accurate and minimally invasive dental autotransplantation, reducing extra-alveolar time and preserving the vitality of the periodontal ligament.
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.