Dear Editor,

I read with interest a recent article by Prof Abou Rass in Journal of Oral Implantology where he described interim endodontic implant site preparation to regenerate the alveolar bone defects of hopeless teeth planned for extraction and immediate replacement with implants. The author claims that the article introduces an alternative treatment approach, “interim endodontic implant site preparation.” It would seem that the author is unaware of Dr Huelsmann's paper “Root canal treatment as a treatment modality for temporary tooth retention in adolescent patients,” (Journal of Clinical Dentistry, 1997) in which he introduced the concept of temporary endodontic treatment for future implant placement. This is an excellent example of multiple dentists looking at the evidence, and trying “new” or “novel” clinical techniques based upon what they know from the literature, without being aware of what others are doing. I believe we tend to do this relatively frequently when faced with teeth or situations with hopeless prognosis, and little to lose if the treatment does not work out as we hope it will. In these cases, it has been my experience that 2 practitioners on separate continents (as in this case) can be pursuing similar lines of novel treatment at roughly the same time, and be totally unaware of what the other is doing, or has published.

I am sure that after reading the references he cited, like the Misch article (Single-tooth replacement: treatment options. In: Misch CE, ed. Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 3rd ed. St. Louis, MO; Mosby Elsevier Canada; 2008:327–366), and looking at the citations in that article, Prof Abou Rass felt reasonably sure that he had found the most relevant papers on this topic and Dr Huelsmann's paper was missed as a reference.


Dr. Mohammed Alshehri, BDS

Riyadh Military Hospital

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia