Determination of the Accuracy of 5 Electronic Apex Locators in the Function of Different Employment Protocols

Oliveira, Tiago Nepomuceno; Vivacqua-Gomes, Nilton; Bernardes, Ricardo Affonso; Vivan, Rodrigo Ricci; Duarte, Marco Antônio Húngaro; Vasconcelos, Bruno Carvalho de

doi:10.1016/j.joen.2017.03.039

Cited by 28 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In another in vivo study of single‐rooted teeth, it was reported that when the APEX mark readings of three different apex locators (Dentaport ZX, Raypex 5, Propex II) were compared for locating major foramen within ±0.5 mm, there was an accuracy percentage of more than 98%, which is in agreement with the results of the present study . In vitro studies on single‐rooted mandibular premolar teeth using two apex locators, Root ZX and Apex ID, showed that using these devices at APEX mark readings was able to achieve the lowest mean error compared to other screen markings, and there was no significant difference within the two devices . This observation is also in agreement with the results of the current study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison of three different apex locators in determining the working length of mandibular first molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis compared with an intraoral periapical radiograph: A block randomized, controlled, clinical trial

Vanitha¹,

Sherwood²

2019

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate determination of the root canal apical termini is essential for a successful root canal treatment. 1 Failure to locate the working length precisely could compromise the clinical outcome of the root canal treatment. 1 Variations in root morphology and radiograph distortion might cause the radiographic apex to differ from the anatomic apex. 2,3 The exact termination point for root canal preparation has been a major subject of debate for decades; 4 in teeth with vital pulps and normal periapical tissues, a higher clinical success rate was achieved when canal preparation ended 1 mm from the radiographic apex, short of the apical foramen at the dentin-cemental junction. 4The drawbacks of employing a radiograph for the determination of working length include the image being only a 2-D representation of the root canal system, a paralleling technique is not always feasible with digital radiographic techniques, and there are concerns with radiation exposure. 5-7 These drawbacks have allowed the apex locators to be widely accepted and are the preferred method for working length determination. A systematic review on the clinical efficacy and accuracy of electronic apex locators reported that Abstract Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical accuracy APEX and 0.5 marks of three different apex locators -iPex II, Root ZX, and Apex ID -before and after canal preparation in the mandibular first molar.Methods: Sixty patients between the ages of 13-60 years participated in the study.After access gaining and canal preparation stages files were inserted with the apex locator clip attached until the electronic apex locators (EALs) shows readings of APEX and 0.5 marks and same is confirmed with periapical radiographs. Eighteen apex locator readings were recorded from each tooth, and 1080 readings were obtained from the 60 patients. Results: Differences among readings from apex locators and radiographic readingswere assessed using paired t test. Only in two patients (1 male and 1 female) were the APEX mark readings different from the radiograph estimation. When the 0.5 mark readings of three different EALs were compared with each other, we could observe that the readings from Root ZX differed significantly (P < 0.05). Conclusions:In the present study, we observed the negligible differences in readings between the EAL at the APEX mark readings, coinciding with the radiographic observation. Clinically, we recommend the apical foramen be located with the apex locators' APEX mark readings prior to identifying the apical constriction position. K E Y W O R D Sapex locator, apical constriction, apical foramen, mandibular first molar, working length

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison of three different apex locators in determining the working length of mandibular first molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis compared with an intraoral periapical radiograph: A block randomized, controlled, clinical trial

Vanitha¹,

Sherwood²

2019

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, in the teeth with resorption as there was no statistically significant differences, the electronic method showed higher accuracy rates (Group 2: 95%, Group 3: 90%, Group 4: 95%) than the radiographic method (Group 5: 90%, Group 6: 95%) in the range ± 1 mm and these results were in accordance with previous studies (Bhat, Shetty, & Anandakrishna, 2017;Oliveira et al, 2017).…”

Section: Measuring Methodssupporting

confidence: 92%

Evaluation of the accuracy of electronic apex locators, cone‐beam computed tomography, and radiovisiography in primary teeth: An in vitro study

Kayabasi

Öznurhan

2020

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electronic apex locators (EALs), cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), and radiovisiography (RVG) claim to determine of working length (WL) in primary molar teeth. To evaluate the accuracy of WL determination by using three EALs, RVG, and CBCT imaging in extracted human primary molar teeth with/without root resorption. Twenty extracted primary molar teeth with resorption and 20 extracted primary molar teeth without resorption were used. After measuring actual lengths (AL) (Group 1), the electronic WL measurements were performed by using three different EALs [COXO C Smart-1 Pro (Group 2), iPex (Group 3), and Apex ID (Group 4)]. Two different image sets were obtained as follows: CBCT imaging (Group 5) and RVG (Group 6). AL measurements performed with an endodontic measuring ruler and compared with the EAL, CBCT, and RVG image measurements. For all groups, there were no significant differences between the teeth with resorption and without. There were no significant differences in measuring methods from AL and between the methods used (p > .05). When electronic and radiographic method were compared in different frequency ranges, there was no statistically significant difference (p > .05). This study showed that EALs, CBCT, and RVG have high accuracy in primary molar teeth both with resorption and without root resorption and can be used for determining WL.

show abstract

“…They concluded apical foramen could be located by EALs and the mechanism of operation of device has little effect on the accuracy. The study also highlighted the step of electronic withdrawal did not significantly help in accurately determining the position of AF [24]. In the present study, lowest mean error for apex ID at "0.0" was 0.43 mm; and at "0.5" was 0.75mm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 42%

“…Negative value indicates measurements short of the actual length. AL: Actual length, EL: Electronically measured canal length the impedance determined by the electronic apex locators [5], [23], [24]. Hor et al, questioned whether the probability to hit the target interval (major foramenminor foramen) could vary for different apex locators in a given canal; and does the canal length estimation depend on the scale point on the display of device or particular frequency used in the measuring circuit [17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distance From File Tip to Apical Constriction/Apical Foramen in Relation To Numeric Scale Reading on Display of Two Electronic Root Canal Length Determining Devices

Gehlot*,

Reddy,

Kalgeri

et al. 2019

IJRTE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern Electronic root canal length determining devices (ERCLD) or Electronic apex locators (EALs), claim to determine accurately the tooth length based on the principle of measuring the impedance between the canal fluid and tip of the file with various frequencies. Many manufacturers claim the electronic apex locators (EALs) to exactly display the reading corresponding to the canal parameters. This invitro evaluation compared if the marks „„0.5‟‟ and „„0.0/APEX‟‟ on the of display of two EALs Sybron endo Apex ID (SID) and Mini apex locator (MINI) were accurately representing the apical constriction or the apical foramen respectively. Materials and Methods: Sixty extracted, single rooted human teeth were used with alginate model. The electronic length was determined using 2 EALs, at the numeric scale/target „„0.5‟‟ and „„0.0/APEX‟‟ mark using Kfile (electrode). After cementing the file coronally with type II glass ionomer cement, the apical 3–4 mm was trimmed until the file tip was visible under an operating microscope (X16). Images were captured under Dental operating microscope and the error between electronic length (EL) and actual length (AL) at target interval 0.5 (apical constriction) and 0.0 (major foramen) were analyzed by used Image J software. RESULTS: t-test revealed statistically significant differences between EL determination and AL for both EALs, at “0.0”/Apex, p=0.001, and at 0.5 (apical constriction) p=0.007. CONCLUSION: The numeric meter display of newer generation EALs like Apex ID, represent better correlation with the histologic landmarks and could become a useful guide for inexperienced clinicians, however they do not always indicate the position of the file in the canal.

show abstract

Determination of the Accuracy of 5 Electronic Apex Locators in the Function of Different Employment Protocols

Cited by 28 publications

References 24 publications

Comparison of three different apex locators in determining the working length of mandibular first molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis compared with an intraoral periapical radiograph: A block randomized, controlled, clinical trial

Comparison of three different apex locators in determining the working length of mandibular first molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis compared with an intraoral periapical radiograph: A block randomized, controlled, clinical trial

Evaluation of the accuracy of electronic apex locators, cone‐beam computed tomography, and radiovisiography in primary teeth: An in vitro study

Distance From File Tip to Apical Constriction/Apical Foramen in Relation To Numeric Scale Reading on Display of Two Electronic Root Canal Length Determining Devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About