A Cadaver-based Comparison of Sleeve-guided Implant-drill and Dynamic Navigation Osteotomy and Root-end Resections.

INTRODUCTION

This study compared the accuracy and efficiency of fully guided static and dynamic computer-assisted surgical navigation techniques for osteotomy and root-end resection (RER).

METHODS

Fifty roots from cadaver heads were divided into two groups: fully guided static computer-assisted endodontic microsurgery (FG sCAEMS) and dynamic computer-assisted endodontic microsurgery (dCAEMS) (all, n = 25). Cone-beam computed tomography scans were taken pre and postoperatively. The osteotomy and RER were planned virtually in the preoperative cone-beam computed tomography scan and guided using 3D-printed surgical guides in the FG sCAEMS and 3D-dynamic navigation system in the dCAEMS. The 2D and 3D deviations and angular deflection were calculated. The osteotomy volume, resected root length, and resection angle were measured. The osteotomy and RER time and the number of procedural mishaps were recorded.

RESULTS

FG sCAEMS was as accurate as dCAEMS, with no difference in the 2D and 3D deviation values or angular deflection (P > .05). The osteotomy and RER time were shortened using FG sCAEMS (P < .05). The FG sCAEMS showed a greater number of incomplete RERs than dCAEMS. Osteotomy volume, RER angle, and root length resected were similar in both groups (P > .05). FG sCAEMS and dCAEMS were feasible for osteotomy and RER.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this cadaver-based study, FG sCAEMS was as accurate as dCAEMS. Both FG sCAEMS and dCAEMS were time-efficient for osteotomy and RER.