Date of Award


Document Type

Thesis - MUSC Only

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)


Oral Rehabilitation


College of Dental Medicine

First Advisor

Joseph E. Assad

Second Advisor

Timothy R. Rohde

Third Advisor

Robert P. Bethea


Introduction: Techniques and armamentarium for intentional replantation have varied throughout the years with no universally accepted clinical treatment guidelines. A wide range of success rates has been reported, and accordingly, this treatment method has often been regarded as a treatment of last resort. However, more recent studies have shown more consistent success rates as high as 88% to 95%. In light of these new studies, intentional replantation may be now considered a more commonly accepted treatment modalities. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to critically examine treatment methods for intentional replantation and compare outcomes when utilizing modern endodontic surgical techniques versus traditional methods. Methods: A search of the literature on intentional replantation techniques was performed using electronic databases including PubMed, Medline, and Scopus. A total of 3,183 articles were generated and screened for relevance based on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, 27 studies were included for critical review of methodology and 14 studies were included for meta-analysis. Results: The mean survival rate when utilizing modern endodontic surgical techniques was 90% compared to 83% when using traditional methods. A Wilcoxon Rank Sum test revealed no statistically significant difference between treatment methods. The coefficient of variance for modern surgical techniques was 0.07 compared to 0.13 for traditional methods. Conclusion: There is considerable heterogeneity of reported treatment regimens for intentional replantation. More consistent outcomes were achieved when utilizing modern endodontic surgical techniques.


All rights reserved. Copyright is held by the author.