Basic Research|Articles in Press

Comparison of a Novel Static Computer-aided Surgical and Freehand Techniques for Osteotomy and Root-end Resection

Published:February 21, 2023DOI:



      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).


      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.


      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).


      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 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


        • Kim S.
        • Kratchman S.
        Modern endodontic surgery concepts and practice: a review.
        J Endod. 2006; 32: 601-623
        • Floratos S.
        • Kim S.
        Modern endodontic microsurgery concepts: a clinical update.
        Dent Clin North Am. 2017; 61: 81-91
        • Strbac G.D.
        • Schnappauf A.
        • Giannis K.
        • et al.
        Guided modern endodontic surgery: a novel approach for guided osteotomy and root resection.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 496-501
        • Giacomino C.M.
        • Ray J.J.
        • Wealleans J.A.
        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
        • Ahn S.Y.
        • Kim N.H.
        • Kim S.
        • et al.
        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
        • Antal M.
        • Nagy E.
        • Braunitzer G.
        • et al.
        Accuracy and clinical safety of guided root end resection with a trephine: a case series.
        Head Face Med. 2019; 15: 30
        • Popowicz W.
        • Palatyńska-Ulatowska A.
        • Kohli M.R.
        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
        • Ray J.J.
        • Giacomino C.M.
        • Wealleans J.A.
        • et al.
        Targeted endodontic microsurgery: digital workflow options.
        J Endod. 2020; 46: 863-871
        • Kim J.E.
        • Shim J.S.
        • Shin Y.
        A new minimally invasive guided endodontic microsurgery by cone beam computed tomography and 3-dimensional printing technology.
        Restor Dent Endod. 2019; 44: e29
        • Hawkins T.K.
        • Wealleans J.A.
        • Pratt A.M.
        • et al.
        Targeted endodontic microsurgery and endodontic microsurgery: a surgical simulation comparison.
        Int Endod J. 2020; 53: 715-722
        • Cáceres Madroño E.
        • Rodríguez Torres P.
        • Oussama S.
        • et al.
        A comparative analysis of the piezoelectric ultrasonic appliance and trephine bur for apical location: an in vitro study.
        J Pers Med. 2021; 11: 1034
        • Benjamin G.
        • Ather A.
        • Bueno M.R.
        • et al.
        Preserving the neurovascular bundle in targeted endodontic microsurgery: a case aeries.
        J Endod. 2021; 47: 509-519
        • Dianat O.
        • Nosrat A.
        • Mostoufi B.
        • et al.
        Accuracy and efficiency of guided root-end resection using a dynamic navigation system: a human cadaver study.
        Int Endod J. 2021; 54: 793-801
        • Martinho F.C.
        • Aldahmash S.A.
        • Cahill T.Y.
        • et al.
        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
        • Aldahmash S.A.
        • Price J.B.
        • Mostoufi B.
        • et al.
        Real-time 3-dimensional dynamic navigation system in endodontic microsurgery: a cadaver study.
        J Endod. 2022; 48: 922-929
      1. Nobel Biocare guided surgery tooling.
        (Available at:) (Accessed January 2022)
        • von Arx T.
        • Janner S.F.
        • Jensen S.S.
        • et al.
        The resection angle in apical surgery: a CBCT assessment.
        Clin Oral Investig. 2016; 20: 2075-2082
        • El Kholy K.
        • Janner S.F.M.
        • Schimmel M.
        • et al.
        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
        • Fonseca Tavares W.L.
        • de Oliveira Murta Pedrosa N.
        • Moreira R.A.
        • et al.
        Limitations and management of static-guided endodontics failure.
        J Endod. 2022; 48: 273-279
        • Tahmaseb A.
        • Wu V.
        • Wismeijer D.
        • et al.
        The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29: 416-435
        • D'haese J.
        • Van De Velde T.
        • Komiyama A.
        • et al.
        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
        • Vercruyssen M.
        • Hultin M.
        • Van Assche N.
        • et al.
        Guided surgery: accuracy and efficacy.
        Periodontol 2000. 2014; 66: 228-246
        • Horwitz J.
        • Zuabi O.
        • Machtei E.E.
        Accuracy of a computerized tomography-guided template-assisted implant placement system: an in vitro study.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20: 1156-1162
        • Kühl S.
        • Payer M.
        • Zitzmann N.U.
        • et al.
        Technical accuracy of printed surgical templates for guided implant surgery with the coDiagnostiX software.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17: e177-e182
        • Cassetta M.
        • Di Mambro A.
        • Di Giorgio G.
        • et al.
        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
        • Koop R.
        • Vercruyssen M.
        • Vermeulen K.
        • et al.
        Tolerance within the sleeve inserts of different surgical guides for guided implant surgery.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 630-634
        • Flügge T.
        • Derksen W.
        • Te Poel J.
        • et al.
        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
        • Nilsson J.
        • Richards R.G.
        • Thor A.
        • et al.
        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
        • von Arx T.
        • Käch S.
        • Suter V.G.A.
        • et al.
        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
        • Anastakis D.J.
        • Regehr G.
        • Reznick R.K.
        • et al.
        Assessment of technical skills transfer from the bench training model to the human model.
        Am J Surg. 1999; 177: 167-170