Autotransplantation can provide patients with all the benefits of a natural tooth, but is seldom considered as a treatment option, in large part because of a lack of knowledge about periodontal tissue or the anatomy of teeth. The authors conducted a literature search using the PubMed database. They searched for key words including "autotransplantation," "clinical indications," "sequence and treatment procedures," "healing factors and prognosis" and "treatment options". Autotransplantation demonstrates as a viable treatment alternative,especially in growing adolescents. It provides a biological and economical treatment option for tooth replacement.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the treatment effects of palatally vs buccally placed temporary anchorage devices. Materials and Methods: Of 40 Class II division 1 malocclusion patients, 22 were treated with modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) appliances (age 21.9 ± 6.6 years), and 18 (age 24.2 ± 6.8 years) were treated with buccally placed miniscrews between the maxillary first molar and second premolar. A total of 26 linear and angular measurements were analyzed on pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms. Multivariate analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the treatment effects within each group and to compare the effects between groups. Results: Overall, the MCPP appliances showed 4.2 mm of distalization, 1.6 mm of intrusion of the first molar with 2° tipping, and 0.8 mm extrusion of incisors. The miniscrew group resulted in 2.0 mm of distalization, 0.1 mm intrusion of the first molar with 7.2° tipping, and 0.3 mm of incisor extrusion. Regarding soft tissue change, in the MCPP group, the upper lip was significantly retracted ( P < .001). Conclusions: Comparing the treatment effects between MCPP appliances and buccal miniscrews, the MCPP appliances showed greater distalization and intrusion with less distal tipping of the first molar and more extrusion of the incisor compared to the buccal miniscrews.

Several studies have indicated a positive response of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) to mandibular advancement, while others have reported that TMJ adaptive responses are non-existent and negligible. Controversy continues to grow over the precise nature of skeletal changes that occur during mandibular growth modification, due to an apparent lack of tissue markers required to substantiate the precise mechanism by which this is occurring. However, evidence suggests that orthopedic forces clinically modify the growth of the mandible. To further our knowledge about the effect of orthopedic treatment on the TMJ, it is necessary that we understand the biologic basis behind the various tissues involved in the TMJ’s normal growth and maturation. The importance of this knowledge is to consider the potential association between TMJ remodeling and mandibular repositioning under orthopedic loading. Considerable histologic and biochemical research has been performed to provide basic information about the nature of skeletal growth modification in response to mandibular advancement. In this review, the relevant histochemical evidence and various theories regarding TMJ growth modification are discussed. Furthermore, different regulatory growth factors and tissue markers, which are used for cellular and molecular evaluation of the TMJ during its adaptive response to biomechanical forces, are underlined.