Apicoectomy and Root-End Resection Outcomes and Surgical Techniques: Scoping Review with ☸️SAIMSARA

Name: SAIMSARA Evidence Object head::APICOECTOMY_SS
Creator: SAIMSARA
License: https://saimsara.com/license/

SAIMSARA

doi:10.62487/saimsarafadf759c

SAIMSARA Journal

Machine-Readable Science • ISSN 3054-3991

Apicoectomy and Root-End Resection Outcomes and Surgical Techniques: Scoping Review with ☸️SAIMSARA

Head and Neck Health

Issue 10, Volume 1, 2026

Chat with this issue

DOI: 10.62487/saimsarafadf759c

Editorial note

• Last update: 2026-06-15 21:06:14

What is this paper about

Apicoectomy outcomes depend not only on surgical skill, but on how precisely the root end is resected and how reliably the retrograde material seals the canal. The full review reveals which guided techniques, bioceramic materials, and procedural factors most strongly influence healing, failure, and long-term success.

Human-verified editorial review Verified by World ID proof-of-human. This editorial layer was submitted from a SAIMSARA account verified as a unique human.

Generated with SAIMSARA v5.1

Video summary generated from this ☸️SAIMSARA evidence map. Full reference-linked paper and evidence JSON are available after purchase.

Abstract: To comprehensively map the existing evidence on apicoectomy and root-end resection by synthesizing research themes related to surgical technique accuracy, retrograde filling material properties, and biological healing outcomes, thereby identifying the central findings and future directions in the field. The review uses 138 references and builds its evidence map from 219 original studies with 9121 total participants/sample observations (topic-deduplicated ΣN). This scoping review indicates that the success of apicoectomy is governed chiefly by two interdependent factors: the precision of root-end resection and the sealing ability of the retrograde material. Guided approaches—static, dynamic, and robotic—were consistently associated with reduced deviations, with dynamic navigation lowering angular deviation to approximately 2.35°–2.45° versus 13.55°–16.20° freehand, while bioceramic cements such as MTA and Biodentine supported favorable healing, with comparable 90% and 94% success at 12 months. Reported overall success rates frequently exceeded 90%, reinforcing that meticulous material placement and resection quality are central prognostic levers, and that incomplete root-end filling remains a leading failure mode. These signals support a practical shift toward technology-assisted navigation paired with well-adapted bioceramic fillings, though most evidence derives from laboratory and small clinical studies. Adequately powered randomized trials directly comparing navigation modalities and material longevity under physiological conditions are needed to clarify which combinations most reliably optimize long-term periapical healing.
.

Keywords: apicoectomy; root-end resection; retrograde filling materials; dentinal microcracks; periapical healing; guided endodontic surgery; microleakage; ultrasonic root-end preparation; bone regeneration; dynamic navigation

Review Stats

Final search date and database lock: 2026-06-01 16:30:17 CEST
Plan: Pro (expanded craft tokens; source: Semantic Scholar)
Source: Semantic Scholar
Total Abstracts/Papers: 881
Downloaded Abstracts/Papers: 881
Included original and non-original Abstracts/Papers (all): 254
Included original Abstracts/Papers (Vote counting by direction of effect): 219
Reference Index (links used in paper): 137
Total participants/sample observations (topic deduplicated ΣN): 9121

Get access to the full paper

Unlock the full evidence map

Full paper access includes the complete human-readable review, figures, reference index, PDF export, and machine-readable Evidence JSON download.
Evidence JSON can also be purchased separately if you only need the LLM-ready object for agent, AI, or RAG workflows.
Institutional or library access? Sign in with your institution email to open all available SAIMSARA papers under your institution access arrangement.
Need a SAIMSARA review on your own topic? ☸️Request.

Reference Index (137)

[1] Topography of root-end surface after freehand and three-dimensional-guided apicoectomy procedure: A scanning electron microscope study — https://doi.org/10.4103/jcde.jcde_77_24
[2] Assessment of marginal integrity of five different polymers in retrograde root-end filling following apicoectomy: An in-vitro analysis with scanning electron microscope and micro-radiography — https://doi.org/10.37190/abb-01861-2021-02
[3] Sealing ability of MTA and amalgam in different root-end preparations and resection bevel angles: an in vitro evaluation using marginal dye leakage. — https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-64402010000500007
[4] Apicoectomy versus apical curettage in combination with or without L-PRF application: a randomized clinical trial — https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-92787-y
[5] Microcracks after apicoectomy with three surgical instruments: A comparative scanning electron microscopy study — https://doi.org/10.4103/jcde.jcde_642_25
[6] Postoperative Pain and Healing in Patients Undergoing Apicoectomy: A Comparative Study of Techniques — https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1463_24
[7] Comparative Evaluation of Sodium Hypochlorite Gel Penetration Using Er,Cr:YSGG Laser and Passive Ultrasonic Activation After Apicoectomy: An In Vitro Study with Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy — https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13237050
[8] Micro-morphometric study of the resected root surface after endoscope-supported apicoectomy — https://doi.org/10.53846/goediss-6351

Unlock the full paper to view the complete Reference Index.