Abstract
Introduction
This study compared the accuracy and efficiency of a novel static computer-aided surgical
technique using a 3-dimensional (3D)-printed surgical guide (3D-SG) with a fully guided
drill protocol (3D-SG FG) to the freehand (FH) osteotomy and root-end resection (RER).
Methods
Forty-six roots from 2 cadaver heads were divided into 2 groups: 3D-SG FG (n = 23) and FH (n = 23). Cone-beam computed tomographic scans were taken preoperatively and postoperatively.
The endodontic microsurgery was planned in Blue Sky Bio software, and the 3D-SG was
designed and 3D printed. The osteotomy and RER were conducted using a guided twist
drill diameter of 2 mm and an ascending tapered drill with diameters of 2.8/3.2, 3.2/3.6,
3.8/4.2, and 4.2 mm with respective guided drill guides. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional
virtual deviations and angular deflection were calculated. Linear osteotomy measures
and root resection angle were obtained. The osteotomy and RER time and the number
of mishaps were recorded.
Results
Two-dimensional and three-dimensional accuracy deviations and angular deflection were
lower in the 3D-SG FG protocol than in the FH technique (P < .05). The height, length, and depth of the osteotomy and root resection angle were
less in the 3D-SG FG protocol than in the FH technique (P < .05). The osteotomy and RER time with the 3D-SG FG protocol were less than the
FH method (P < .05).
Conclusions
Within the limitations of this cadaver-based study using denuded maxillary and mandibular
jaws, 3D-SG FG protocol showed higher accuracy than FH osteotomy and RER. Moreover,
the 3D-SG FG drill protocol significantly reduced the surgical time.
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 accessOne-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:
Subscribe to Journal of EndodonticsAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Modern endodontic surgery concepts and practice: a review.J Endod. 2006; 32: 601-623
- Modern endodontic microsurgery concepts: a clinical update.Dent Clin North Am. 2017; 61: 81-91
- Guided modern endodontic surgery: a novel approach for guided osteotomy and root resection.J Endod. 2017; 43: 496-501
- Targeted endodontic microsurgery: a novel approach to anatomically challenging scenarios using 3-dimensional-printed guides and trephine burs-A report of 3 cases.J Endod. 2018; 44: 671-677
- Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing-guided endodontic surgery: guided osteotomy and apex localization in a mandibular molar with a thick buccal bone plate.J Endod. 2018; 44: 665-670
- Accuracy and clinical safety of guided root end resection with a trephine: a case series.Head Face Med. 2019; 15: 30
- Targeted endodontic microsurgery: computed tomography-based guided stent approach with platelet-rich fibrin graft: a report of 2 cases.J Endod. 2019; 45: 1535-1542
- Targeted endodontic microsurgery: digital workflow options.J Endod. 2020; 46: 863-871
- A new minimally invasive guided endodontic microsurgery by cone beam computed tomography and 3-dimensional printing technology.Restor Dent Endod. 2019; 44: e29
- Targeted endodontic microsurgery and endodontic microsurgery: a surgical simulation comparison.Int Endod J. 2020; 53: 715-722
- A comparative analysis of the piezoelectric ultrasonic appliance and trephine bur for apical location: an in vitro study.J Pers Med. 2021; 11: 1034
- Preserving the neurovascular bundle in targeted endodontic microsurgery: a case aeries.J Endod. 2021; 47: 509-519
- Accuracy and efficiency of guided root-end resection using a dynamic navigation system: a human cadaver study.Int Endod J. 2021; 54: 793-801
- Comparison of the accuracy and efficiency of a 3-dimensional dynamic navigation system for osteotomy and root-end resection performed by novice and experienced endodontists.J Endod. 2022; 48: 1327-1333.e1
- Real-time 3-dimensional dynamic navigation system in endodontic microsurgery: a cadaver study.J Endod. 2022; 48: 922-929
- Nobel Biocare guided surgery tooling.(Available at:) (Accessed January 2022)
- The resection angle in apical surgery: a CBCT assessment.Clin Oral Investig. 2016; 20: 2075-2082
- The influence of guided sleeve height, drilling distance, and drilling key length on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019; 21: 101-107
- Limitations and management of static-guided endodontics failure.J Endod. 2022; 48: 273-279
- The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29: 416-435
- Accuracy and complications using computer-designed stereolithographic surgical guides for oral rehabilitation by means of dental implants: a review of the literature.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012; 14: 321-335
- Guided surgery: accuracy and efficacy.Periodontol 2000. 2014; 66: 228-246
- Accuracy of a computerized tomography-guided template-assisted implant placement system: an in vitro study.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20: 1156-1162
- Technical accuracy of printed surgical templates for guided implant surgery with the coDiagnostiX software.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17: e177-e182
- The influence of the tolerance between mechanical components on the accuracy of implants inserted with a stereolithographic surgical guide: a retrospective clinical study.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17: 580-588
- Tolerance within the sleeve inserts of different surgical guides for guided implant surgery.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 630-634
- Registration of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral surface scans–a prerequisite for guided implant surgery with CAD/CAM drilling guides.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017; 28: 1113-1118
- Virtual bite registration using intraoral digital scanning, CT and CBCT: in vitro evaluation of a new method and its implication for orthognathic surgery.J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016; 44: 1194-1200
- Perforation of the maxillary sinus floor during apical surgery of maxillary molars: a retrospective analysis using cone beam computed tomography.Aust Endod J. 2020; 46: 176-183
- Assessment of technical skills transfer from the bench training model to the human model.Am J Surg. 1999; 177: 167-170
Article info
Publication history
Published online: February 21, 2023
Publication stage
In Press Corrected ProofIdentification
Copyright
© 2023 American Association of Endodontists.
