https://doi.org/10.32067/GIE.2024.38.01.19
A comparison in the efficacy of 3D-printed guides versus traditional endodontic access: an ex-vivo study
Accepted: 1 October 2024
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Authors
Aim: This ex-vivo study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and efficacy of digitally designed 3D-printed endodontic guides (3DGs) to achieving a conservative endodontic access preparation on maxillary molars in comparison to a traditional endodontic access (TRAD).
Methodology: Eighty extracted maxillary molars were divided into two groups: (1) TRAD access and (2) 3DG access. Two operators with varying levels of experience performed both approaches. Time allocated to perform each procedure was recorded. Volumetric analysis was done by comparing data from the pre- and the post-operative CBCTs.
Results: Both operators with the 3DG cavity access located 100% of the canals present, while the TRAD groups missed 30.76–81.81% of second mesiobuccal canals. Time required and substance loss were significantly lower in the 3DG group vs. the TRAD group.
Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, the use of an endodontic 3DGs helped in preserving a significantly more dental structure in a significantly less time.
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.
