Comparison of Success of Implants versus Endodontically Treated Teeth

Published:September 22, 2008DOI:


      Implants verses root canal therapy is a current controversy in dentistry. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the success of each treatment, with minimal subjective grading. Outcome was determined by clinical chart notes and radiographs. Failure was defined as removal of the implant or tooth. Uncertain findings for implants were defined as mobility class I or greater, radiographic signs of bone loss, or an additional surgical procedure. Mobility, periapical index score of 3 or greater, or the need for apical surgery was classified as uncertain for endodontically treated teeth. Success was recorded if the implant or tooth was in place and functional. Implants were placed by periodontists in a group practice, whereas the endodontic treatments were performed by endodontists in group practice. Charts of 129 implants meeting inclusion criteria showed follow-up of an average of 36 months (range, 15–57 months), with a success rate of 98.4%. One hundred forty-three endodontically treated teeth were followed for an average of 22 months (range, 18–59 months), with a success rate of 99.3%. No statistically significant differences were found (P = .56). When uncertain findings were added to the failures, implant success dropped to 87.6%, and endodontic success declined to 90.2%. This difference was not statistically significant (P = .61). We found that 12.4% of implants required interventions, whereas 1.3% of endodontically treated teeth required interventions, which was statistically significant (P = .0003). The success of implant and endodontically treated teeth was essentially identical, but implants required more postoperative treatments to maintain them.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Endodontics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Friedman S.
        • Abitol S.
        • Lawrence H.
        Treatment outcome in endodontics: The Toronto Study—phase 1: initial treatment.
        J Endod. 2003; 29: 787-793
        • Ingle J.I.
        • Beveridge E.E.
        • Glick D.H.
        • et al.
        Modern endodontic therapy.
        in: Ingle J.I. Endodontics. 3rd ed. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia1985: 26-50
        • Swartz D.B.
        • Skidmore A.E.
        • Griffin J.A.
        Twenty years of endodontic success and failure.
        J Endod. 1983; 9: 198-202
        • Alley B.S.
        • Kitchens G.G.
        • Alley L.W.
        • et al.
        A comparison of survival of teeth following endodontic treatment performed by general dentists or by specialists.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004; 98: 115-118
        • Salehrabi R.
        • Rotstein I.
        Endodontic treatment outcomes in a large patient populption in the USA: an epidemilological study.
        J Endod. 2004; 30: 846-850
        • Lazarski M.P.
        • Walker W.A.
        • Flores C.M.
        • et al.
        Epidemiological evaluation of the outcomes of nonsurgical root canal treatment in a large cohort of insured dental patients.
        J Endod. 2001; 27: 791-796
        • van Steenberghe D.
        Outcomes and their measurement in clinical trials of endosseous oral implants.
        Ann Periodontol. 1997; 2: 291-298
        • Misch C.E.
        • Perel M.L.
        • Wang H.L.
        • et al.
        Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference.
        Implant Dent. 2008; 17: 5-15
        • Doyle S.L.
        • Hodges J.S.
        • Pesun I.J.
        • et al.
        Factors affecting outcomes for single-tooth implants and endodontic restorations.
        J Endod. 2007; 33: 399-402
        • Alley B.S.
        • Buchanan T.H.
        • Eleazer P.D.
        Comparison of the success of root canal therapy in HIV/AIDS patients and non-infected controls.
        Gen Dent. 2008; 56: 155-157
        • Sundqvist G.
        • Figdor D.
        • Persson S.
        • Sjogven U.
        Microbiologic analysis of teeth with failed endodontic treatment and the outcome of conservative re-treatment.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1998; 85: 86-93
        • Siqueira Jr, J.F.
        Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: why well-treated teeth can fall.
        Int Endod J. 2001; 34: 1-10
        • Chavez de Paz L.E.
        Redefining the persistent infection in root canals: possible role of biofilm communities.
        J Endod. 2007; 33: 652-662
        • Jaffin R.A.
        • Berman C.I.
        The excessive loss of Branemark fixtures in type IV bone: a 5 year analysis.
        J Periodontol. 1991; 62: 2
        • Kozlovsky A.
        • Tal H.
        • Laufer B.Z.
        • et al.
        Impact of implant overloading on the peri-implant bone in inflamed and non-inflamed peri-implant mucosa.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18: 601-610
      1. Tabanella G, Nowzari H, Slots J. Clinical microbiological determinants of ailing dental implants. [published online ahead of print April 1, 2008]. Clin Implant Dental Relat Res.doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00088.x.

        • Schwartz-Arad D.
        • Laviv A.
        • Levin L.
        Failure causes, timing, and cluster behavior: an 8-year study of dental implants.
        Implant Dent. 2008; 17: 200-207
        • Roos-Jansaker A.M.
        Long time follow up of implant therapy and treatment of peri-implantitis.
        Swed Dent J Suppl. 2007; 188: 7-66
        • Roos-Jansaker A.M.
        • Renvert H.
        • Lindahl C.H.
        • et al.
        Nine- to fourteen-year follow-up of implant treatment: part III—factors associated with peri-implant lesions.
        J Clin Periodontol. 2006; 33: 296-301
        • Karoussis I.K.
        • Salvi G.E.
        • Heitz-Mayfield L.J.
        • et al.
        Long-term implant prognosis in patients with and without a history of chronic periodontitis: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003; 14: 329-339
        • Newman N.G.
        • Takei H.H.
        • Carranza F.A.
        Carranza's clinical periodontology.
        in: 9th ed. WB Saunders Co, Philadelphia2002: 931-942
        • Orstavik D.
        • Kerekes K.
        • Eriksen H.M.
        The periapical index: a scoring system for radiographic assessment of apical periodontitis.
        Endod Dent Traumatol. 1986; 2: 20-34
        • Iqbal M.K.
        • Kim S.
        A review of factors influencing treatment planning decisions of single-tooth implants versus preserving natural teeth with nonsurgical endodontic therapy.
        J Endod. 2008; 34: 519-529
        • Balevi B.
        Root canal therapy, fixed partial dentures and implant-supported crowns, have similar short term survival rates.
        Evid Based Dent. 2008; 9: 15-17
        • Torabinejad M.
        • Anderson P.
        • Bader J.
        • et al.
        Outcomes of root canal treatment and restoration, implant-supported single crowns, fixed partial dentures and extraction without replacement: a systematic review.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2007; 98: 285-311