Abstract Background The surgical treatment of severe and complex adult spinal deformity (ASD) commonly required three-column osteotomy (3-CO), which was technically demanding with high risk of neurological deficit. Personalized three dimensional (3D)-printed guide template based on preoperative planning has been gradually applied in 3-CO procedure. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and precision of 3D-printed osteotomy guide template and free-hand technique in the treatment of severe and complex ASD patients requiring 3-CO. Methods This was a single-centre retrospective comparative cohort study of patients with severe and complex ASD (Cobb angle of scoliosis > 80° with flexibility 90°) who underwent posterior spinal fusion and 3-CO between January 2020 to January 2023, with a minimum 12 months follow-up. Personalized computer-assisted three-dimensional osteotomy simulation was performed for all recruited patients, who were further divided into template and non-template groups based on the application of 3D-printed osteotomy guide template according to the surgical planning. Patients in the two groups were age- and gender- propensity-matched. The radiographic parameters, postoperative neurological deficit, and precision of osteotomy execution were compared between groups. Results A total of 40 patients (age 36.53 ± 11.98 years) were retrospectively recruited, with 20 patients in each group. The preoperative focal kyphosis (FK) was 92.72° ± 36.77° in the template group and 93.47° ± 33.91° in the non-template group, with a main curve Cobb angle of 63.35° (15.00°, 92.25°) and 64.00° (20.25°, 99.20°), respectively. Following the correction surgery, there were no significant differences in postoperative FK, postoperative main curve Cobb angle, correction rate of FK (54.20% vs. 51.94%, P = 0.738), and correction rate of main curve Cobb angle (72.41% vs. 61.33%, P = 0.101) between the groups. However, the match ratio of execution to simulation osteotomy angle was significantly greater in the template group than the non-template group (coronal: 89.90% vs. 74.50%, P