Revascularization of immature permanent teeth with apical periodontitis

• Published in: International endodontic journal Vol. 47; no. 4; pp. 321 - 331
• Main Authors: Moreno-Hidalgo, M. C., Caleza-Jimenez, C., Mendoza-Mendoza, A., Iglesias-Linares, A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01-04-2014
• Subjects: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology; apexification; Dentistry; Dentition, Permanent; Humans; immature tooth; Neovascularization, Physiologic; Periapical Periodontitis - therapy; tooth revascularization; Tooth, Nonvital; apexification; immature tooth; tooth revascularization
• ISSN: 0143-2885; 1365-2591
• DOI: 10.1111/iej.12154

The aim of this minireview was to identify and review the scientific evidence regarding regenerative endodontic protocols claiming to revascularize permanent immature teeth with apical periodontitis. The literature was identified using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Scirus, EMBASE and Cochrane databases up to February 2013. Studies were selected independently by two different researchers (kappa index: 0.88), based on established inclusion/exclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the reviewed papers was classified as high, medium or low (HQ, MQ, LQ). The search strategy identified 285 titles. Nine studies, both human and animal based, were selected after application of the criteria (LQ:5; MQ:4). In most of these studies (seven of nine), the revascularization protocol included a triple antibiotic combination as canal disinfectant for a period of 1–4 weeks after blood clot formation (LQ:5; MQ:4), although there is no clear consensus about the treatment protocol. Two studies reported tooth discoloration after the revascularization process (LQ:2), and only three (LQ:1; MQ:2) reported a success rate of 54.9% in dogs and 73.6% and 80% in humans, respectively.
Revascularization of immature permanent teeth with apical periodontitis is possible and preferable to apexification. Nevertheless, there is a widespread lack of randomized clinical trials and blinded measures. In addition, the small sample sizes that are common in these studies as well as the generally low quality of the analysed publications require the results to be viewed with caution. There is a high risk of bias, with a low quality of available information, for developing clinical guidelines for regenerative endodontic protocols; rigorous randomized clinical trials are therefore needed.