A Comparison of the Success of Root Resected Molars and Molar Position Implants in Function in a Private Practice: Results of up to 15‐Plus Years

Abstract

Both molar root resection and appropriate restoration and molar implant placement and restoration demonstrated a high degree of success in function. However, this success rate is markedly affected when either the root resected molar or molar implant is a lone standing terminal abutment. Care must be taken to choose the appropriate treatment modality for a given patient scenario.

Factors Influencing the Outcome of Root‐Resection Therapy in Molars: A 10‐Year Retrospective Study

“…They stated that root‐resection therapy had poor long‐term results unless a high level of expertise was available in all applicable disciplines. In contrast, Fugazzotto 10 reported 15‐year cumulative success rates of 96.8% for root‐resected molars and 97.0% for molar implants. He concluded that molar root–resection therapy and implant therapy had a high degree of functional success.…”

Root Resection: An Alternative Treatment Option to Extraction

“…Some investigators have compared the prognosis of root resection therapy to that of implant therapy. Fugazzotto [9] reported 15-year cumulative success rates of 96.8% for root resected molars and 97.0% for molar implants. He concluded that molar rootresection therapy and implant therapy had a high degree of functional success.…”

Hemisection as an Interim Treatment Prior to Implant Therapy: Case Report

“…10 In contrast, another study with a follow-up period of 15 years reported equal success rates for both the treatment modalities. 11 Park et al reported a success rate of 60.1% for root resection therapy at the end of a 10-year follow-up period. 12 The authors were also suggested that periodontal reasons were the most common causes for failure.…”