To compare and contrast the accuracy of piezoelectric ultrasonic insert (PUI) and trephine bur (TB) osteotomy site preparation techniques for apical location. (1) Material and methods: A total of 138 osteotomy site preparations were randomly distributed into one of two study groups. Group A: TB technique (n = 69) and B: PUI technique (n = 69). A preoperative cone-beam computed tomography scan and an intraoral scan were performed and uploaded to implant-planning software to plan the virtual osteotomy site preparations for apical location. Subsequently, the osteotomy site preparations were performed in the experimental models with both osteotomy site preparation techniques and a postoperative CBCT scan was performed and uploaded into the implant-planning software and matched with the virtually planned osteotomy site preparations to measure the deviation angle and horizontal deviation as captured at the coronal entry point and apical end-point between osteotomy site preparations using Student's t-test statistical analysis. (2) Results: The paired t-test found statistically significant differences at the coronal entry-point deviations (p = 0.0104) and apical end-point deviations (p = 0.0104) between the TB and PUI study groups; however, no statistically significant differences were found in the angular deviations (p = 0.309) between the trephine bur and piezoelectric ultrasonic insert study groups. (3) Conclusions: The results showed that the TB is more accurate than the PUI for apical location.
Keywords: apical location; apicoectomy; cone-beam computed tomography scan; piezoelectric; trephine bur.