Andreasen JO, Paulsen HU, Yu Z A long-term study of 370 autotransplanted premolars. Part II. Tooth survival and pulp healing subsequent to transplantation. Eur J Orthod. 1990; 12:14-24
Kim E, Jung JY, Cha IH Evaluation of the prognosis and causes of failure in 182 cases of autogenous tooth transplantation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005; 100:112-119
Park S, Lee H, Lee E Guided autotransplantation of impacted canines using a cad/cam surgical template. Children (Basel). 2023; 10
Lee SJ, Jung IY, Lee CY Clinical application of computer-aided rapid prototyping for tooth transplantation. Dent Traumatol. 2001; 17:114-119
Paulsen HU Autotransplantation of teeth in orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119:336-337
Czochrowska EM, Stenvik A, Album B, Zachrisson BU Autotransplantation of premolars to replace maxillary incisors: a comparison with natural incisors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118:592-600
Tsukiboshi M Autotransplantation of teeth: requirements for predictable success. Dent Traumatol. 2002; 18:157-180
Plakwicz P, Wojtowicz A, Czochrowska EM Survival and success rates of autotransplanted premolars: a prospective study of the protocol for developing teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144:229-237
Clokie CM, Yau DM, Chano L Autogenous tooth transplantation: an alternative to dental implant placement?. J Can Dent Assoc. 2001; 67:92-96
Andersson L, Bodin I, Sörensen S Progression of root resorption following replantation of human teeth after extended extraoral storage. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1989; 5:38-47

A digital approach to tooth autotransplantation: a case report

From Volume 51, Issue 6, June 2024 | Pages 385-389


Pynadath George

BDS, MFDS, MSc RestDent, MSc ImpDent, DClinDent OralSurg, Fellow CGDent

Specialist Oral Surgeon

Articles by Pynadath George

Email Pynadath George

Ameer Allybocus

BDS, PGCert Dent, Ed, PGCert Dent Imp

General Dentist, Leicester

Articles by Ameer Allybocus


In this article, we present a case report on the autotransplantation of an upper left canine (UL3) into the site of a retained upper left deciduous canine (ULC) in a 36-year-old male using a digital guided approach. The procedure involved meticulous pre-operative planning, careful extraction of the ULC and UL3, and the use of a stereolithic tooth and a surgical guide created using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) data. Follow-up included endodontic treatment post-transplantation. The successful outcome of this case underscores the importance of how imaging techniques can help to provide successful and predictable autotransplantation results. This case report highlights the successful integration of a transplanted tooth and the unique approach to the techniques used.

CPD/Clinical Relevance: Autotransplantation of an impacted tooth can be considerd as a treatment option for the adult patient with a single tooth edentulous space or retained deciduous tooth.


Autotransplantation involves the relocation of a tooth from one part of the mouth to another. This has evolved significantly over the years to become a crucial technique in oral rehabilitation. While the concept is not new to dentistry, it has seen its application and success rate increase dramatically, particularly due to advancements in surgical techniques and imaging technologies. The foundational work by Andreasen et al has been instrumental in demonstrating the viability and success of these procedures.1

Autotransplantation presents itself as a viable alternative to more conventional methods such as bridges, dentures, implants, or orthodontic treatments. The evaluation of the prognosis and causes of failure in autogenous tooth transplantation by Kim et al has provided a deeper understanding of critical factors that contribute to the success of such procedures. Two of these pertinent areas of consideration are the initial stability of the transplanted tooth, and the extra-oral time experienced by donor teeth. Transplanted teeth require a recipient site that has been as precisely prepared as possible, and while the computer-aided rapid protoype (CARP) tooth model allows operators the means to do so, success ultimately rests on the skill of the surgical operator and their preparation of the recipient site. This evaluation by Kim et al revealed improved results in early healing, but no significant difference in the later healing stages. With regards to extra-oral time, it has been noted that the less time this is, the better. This is due to increased potential for root surface injury, which can lead to root resorption or ankylosis.2

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Up to 2 free articles per month
  • New content available