Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study

Swapna, Devarsanahalli Venkataramanaswamy; Krishna, Akash; Patil, Anand C; Rashmi, K; Pai, Veena S; Ranjini, Mandagere Aswathanarayana

doi:10.4103/0972-0707.159726

Cited by 15 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are conflicting arguments regarding the accuracies of EALs. Swapna et al ( 33 ), Singh et al ( 34 ) and Altunbas et al ( 35 ) have reported that Raypex 5 was accurate in 93.2%, 91% and 91.7% of the cases, respectively. Somma et al ( 36 ), who had compared the accuracies of Raypex 5, Propex II and Dentaport ZX in an in vivo study, have found that the percentage of EWL accuracy within ± 0.5 mm range was 20% for Raypex 5.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A Comparative Assessment of the Accuracies of Raypex 5, Raypex 6, Ipex and Ipex Ii Electronic Apex Locators: An in Vitro Study

Gürel

Kıvanç

Ekıcı

2016

J Istanbul Univ Fac Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The aims of this study were to examine the accuracy of iPex II and to compare it with those of Raypex 5, Raypex 6 and iPex electronic apex locators (EALs).Materials and Methods:Thirty fresh human mandibular premolar teeth were used in this study. Crown segments were cut and root canals were coronally flared. A #10 K-file was inserted until its tip can be seen within apical foramen to determine actual working length (AWL). Teeth were embedded in alginate and each multi-frequency EALs were randomly tested to determine the electronic working length (EWL). Differences between AWLs and EWLs were statistically compared.Results:No significant differences were found between four EALs. EWL measurements by Raypex 5 were accurate in 64.29%, Raypex 6 in 53.58%, iPex in 64.29% and iPex II in 50% of the specimens, within the range of ±0.5 mm from the AWL.Conclusion:Within the limitations of this in vitro experiment, our findings indicate that the accuracy of working length measurements calculated with iPex II was similar to those of other multi-frequency EALs used in this study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A Comparative Assessment of the Accuracies of Raypex 5, Raypex 6, Ipex and Ipex Ii Electronic Apex Locators: An in Vitro Study

Gürel

Kıvanç

Ekıcı

2016

J Istanbul Univ Fac Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Its reliability has been confirmed by a large number of studies and the findings of this study were similar to those of other studies. 25,[31][32][33] The multiple frequency processing technologies and use of RMS (root mean square) incorporated into the Raypex 6 may have theoretical advantages for increasing the accuracy of the working length measurements, by reducing the electrical noises affecting other physical parameters like amplitude or phase of the electrical signal that is used by other EALs. But the technology improvements were not enough to make the Raypex 6 significantly more accurate than the Raypex 5 (p > 0.05), which appears to be an extremely accurate fourth-generation EAL.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Four Electronic Apex Locators in Detecting Working Length: An Ex Vivo Study

Yolagiden

Erşahan

Suyun

et al. 2018

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To compare the accuracy of four different electronic apex locators (EALs) in detecting a position 0.5 mm short of the major foramen. Materials and methods:The actual working length of thirty-five extracted human teeth was determined visually as 0.5 mm short of the apical foramen. After actual working length measurements, electronic working length was measured with four different EALs (Apex Pointer+, Raypex 5, Apex ID, and Raypex 6). Measurements were repeated three times by different operators. The data were analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the repeated measure analysis of variance (rANOVA) and Bonferroni post hoc tests. The significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. Results:The mean differences between electronic and actual working length were-0.305 mm, 0.098 mm, 0.037, and 0.144 mm for the Apex Pointer+, the Raypex 5, the Apex ID, and the Raypex 6, respectively. Multiple paired comparisons (Bonferroni test) also showed the Apex Pointer+ is significantly different from the Raypex 5, Apex ID and Raypex 6 (p = 0.000, p = 0.001, and p = 0.001 respectively). Conclusion:All EALs showed an acceptable determination of the working length between the ranges of ± 0.5mm except for the Apex Pointer+ device, which had the lowest accuracy. Further studies may be beneficial especially to better evaluate the accuracy of the Apex Pointer+.Clinical significance: This article shows that Apex ID, which has only recently been introduced into the market, showed an acceptable determination of the working length. Its accuracy was similar to that of Raypex 5 and 6.

show abstract

“…Swapna ve ark. 29 33 çalışmalarındaki metodoloji farklılığı nedeniyle mevcut çalışmanın sonuçları paralellik göstermemektedir. Aggarwal ve ark.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Comparison of the accuracies of multi-frequency electronic apex locators in teeth with enlarged apical foramina: ex vivo

Ekici

Kıvanç

Ekıcı

2017

Acta Odontologica Turcica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı çaplarda apikal foramenlere sahip dişlerde yeni geliştirilmiş multi-frekans elektronik apeks bulucu iPex II ile üç farklı multi-frekans elektronik apeks bulucunun doğruluğunun karşılaştırılmasıdır. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Çalışmada 26 adet çekilmiş alt çene küçük azı dişi kullanıldı. Dişlerin kronlarının uzaklaştırılmasından sonra kök kanalları koronal olarak genişletildi. Gerçek çalışma boyu tespiti, #15 K-tipi eğenin ucu apikal foramende görünür hale gelene kadar ilerletilerek yapıldı. Gerçek çalışma boyu, lastik stoper ve eğe arasındaki uzunluktan 0.5 mm kısa olarak kabul edildi. ProTaper F1, F2 ve F3 (Dentsply Maillefer) eğeler ile apikal açıklıktan 1 mm ilerde taşkın preparasyonlar yapıldı. Dişler, koronal 5 mm'leri açıkta kalacak şekilde aljinat ile teflon kalıplara gömüldü. Raypex 5 (VDW), Raypex 6 (VDW), iPex (NSK Inc.) ve iPex II (NSK Inc.) elektronik apeks bulucular kullanılarak elektronik çalışma boyu ölçümleri yapıldı. Elektronik ve gerçek çalışma boyları arasındaki farklar hesaplandı. Elektronik apeks bulucuların doğruluklarının istatistiksel değerlendirmesinde tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) kullanıldı (α=0.05). BULGULAR: Gruplar-arası karşılaştırmada, elektronik apeks bulucuların doğrulukları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık görülmedi (p>0.05). Grup-içi karşılaştırmada, farklı apikal foramen çaplarına göre elektronik apeks bulucuların doğrulukları arasında yine istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık görülmedi (p>0.05). SONUÇ: Apikal foramenleri genişletilmiş dişlerde, iPex II ve diğer elektronik apeks bulucuların çalışma boyu ölçümleri arasında farklılık olmadığı görüldü. Kullanılan tüm elektronik apeks bulucuların çalışma boyu ölçümlerinin klinik olarak kabul edilebilir olduğu bulundu. ANAHTAR KELİMELER: Apikal foramen; dişler; kök kanal tedavisi KAYNAK GÖSTERMEK İÇİN: Ekici MA, Helvacıoğlu Kıvanç B, Ekici A. Genişletilmiş apikal foramenlere sahip dişlerde multi-frekans elektronik apeks bulucuların doğruluğunun karşılaştırılması: ex vivo.

show abstract

Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study

Cited by 15 publications

References 19 publications

A Comparative Assessment of the Accuracies of Raypex 5, Raypex 6, Ipex and Ipex Ii Electronic Apex Locators: An in Vitro Study

A Comparative Assessment of the Accuracies of Raypex 5, Raypex 6, Ipex and Ipex Ii Electronic Apex Locators: An in Vitro Study

Comparison of Four Electronic Apex Locators in Detecting Working Length: An Ex Vivo Study

Comparison of the accuracies of multi-frequency electronic apex locators in teeth with enlarged apical foramina: ex vivo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About