Accuracy of three electronic apex locators in determining the apical foramen in multi-rooted teeth: Randomised clinical and laboratory study

Accuracy of working length measurement by Raypex 6: Electronic apex locator versus actual measurements under stereomicroscope

Background/Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the precision of the Raypex 6 apex locator in locating the apical constriction (AC) and major foramen (MF) during a root canal treatment compared with a microscopic evaluation. Another aim of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of the Raypex 6 in the presence of different irrigating solutions (NaOCl, saline, EDTA, etidronic acid-HEBP). Material and Methods: One hundred and nine patients were included in this study and were randomly assigned into four groups according to the irrigation solution used; NaOCl, EDTA, HEBF and saline. Electronic MF (EMF) and AC (EAC) were measured by using Raypex 6. The teeth were extracted. The apical 3 mm of each canal was trimmed to expose the file tip. The samples were observed under a stereomicroscope, and the actual length of MF (ALMF) and AC (ALAC) were measured. The data were analyzed by using x2 test, and significance was set at P< 0.05. Results: The Raypex 6 was accurate 71.4% of the time to ±0.5mm and 93.3% of the time to ±1mm in determining the ALAC. While similar ALAC-EAC differences were observed in EDTA, NaOCl, and saline groups (p= 0.230), the highest differences were seen in the HEBP group (p= 1.000). The precision of Raypex 6 in determining the working length measurement depends on the type of irrigation. All solutions allowed reliable detection of AC. However, HEBF significantly increased the risk of overpreparation. Conclusions: Raypex 6 can be recommended for clinical use and its accuracy is not affected by the type of irrigant when locating MF.

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

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 readings were 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.

Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy of Two Electronic Apex Locators in the Presence of Contemporary Irrigants: An In vitro Study

Aim:

The present study was aimed to compare the accuracy of Root ZX Mini and Propex II in the presence of 0.1% octinidine dohydrochloride (OCT), 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX), and 5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) heated and nonheated before and after preparation.

Materials and Methods:

Eighty extracted single-rooted teeth were selected for the study and decoronated. Teeth were mounted in an alginate model. Actual working length (AL) was measured using a stereomicroscope under ×4 magnification. Electronic working length measurements were recorded using Root ZX Mini and Propex II apex locators in the presence of 0.1% OCT, 2% CHX, and 5% NaOCl (nonheated and heated to 60°C) before and after preparation. Mean and standard deviation differences before and after preparation were calculated and statistically analyzed using analysis of variance and paired t-test.

Results:

The accuracy of Root ZX Mini before and after preparation within ±0.5 mm of AL was consistently high in the presence of irrigants than Propex II. 5% NaOCl (heated and nonheated) showed more variation than the other irrigants, in the working length determination in both the apex locators.

Conclusion:

Electronic length measurements were shorter with heated and nonheated 5% NaOCl and longer with 0.1% OCT and 2% CHX for both the electronic apex locators.

The Influence of Various Irrigants on the Accuracy of 2 Electronic Apex Locators in Locating Simulated Root Perforations

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the Dentaport ZX (Morita Co, Kyoto, Japan) and the Rootor (Meta Biomed, Cheongwon-gun, Korea) electronic apex locators (EALs) in detecting root perforations in dry conditions and in the presence of the following irrigation solutions: 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 0.9% saline solution (NaCl), and 17% EDTA.

METHODS

Twenty extracted, single-rooted human teeth were perforated artificially in the middle section. The actual canal lengths (ALs) up to the perforation site were determined, and then the teeth were embedded in an alginate mold. The electronic measurements of the perforations were obtained using a size 20 K-file by each EAL in various conditions. For each tooth, the AL was subtracted from the electronic length of the perforation. Statistical analyses were performed using the Friedman and Wilcoxon signed rank tests at a significance level of P < .05.

RESULTS

The most accurate measurements for both EALs were obtained in dry conditions. Among the irrigation solutions in the Dentaport ZX group, EDTA gave the most accurate results, and NaOCl gave the least accurate ones. However, measurements with NaCl were closer to the AL than those obtained with EDTA for the Rootor group. Significant differences were noted among the EALs when the measurements were taken with NaOCl, NaCl, and EDTA (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The Dentaport ZX was more accurate compared with the Rootor in the presence of different irrigants. The content of the root canal affected the accuracy of both EALs. The most accurate measurements were obtained in dry canals.