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

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.

Effectiveness of three electronic apex locators to determine root canal working length / Efectividad de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos para determinar la longitud radicular de trabajo

This study was to evaluate in vivo the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs) in determining working length (WL) using hand files and a wear technique. Thirty two premolars that were completely formed apically and that were scheduled for extraction for orthodontic reasons from patients between ages of 15 and 20 years old were included. Electronic measurement of WL was performed using the EAL according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The following three EAL were used: A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, and C. Propex II. There were significant difference (p=0.0002) when comparing median differences among the three EAL. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 and Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p=0.0044; p=0.0002), while between aypex 5 and Propex II, there were no statistically significant differences with respect to the accuracy of the EAL in determining WL (p=0.1087). The present findings suggest that Root ZX II presented the highest agreement rate for determining the final WL...

Estudio fue evaluar in vivo la exactitud de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos(LAEs) para determinar la longitud de trabajo (LT) usando instrumentos manuales y una técnica de desgaste. Treinta y dos premolares con formación apical completa e indicados para extracción por razones ortodóncicas de pacientes de edad entre 15 y 20 años fueron incluidos en el estudio. Seusaron tres LAE; A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, y C. Propex II. Se encontraron diferencias significativas (p=0.0002) cuando se compararon las medianas entre los tres LAE. El análisismostró diferencias entre Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 y Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p=0.0044; p=0,0002), mientras queentre Raypex 5 y Propex II, no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la determinación de la LT (p=0.1087). Los presentes hallazgos sugieren que Root ZX II mostró la mayor exactitud para determinar la LT final...

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

AIM: The aim of this in vivo study was to compare the accuracy of Root ZX and Raypex 5 in detecting minor diameter in human permanent single-rooted teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients with completely formed single-rooted permanent teeth indicated for extraction were selected for the study. Crown was flattened for stable reference point and access cavity prepared. Working length was determined with both apex locators. A 15 K file adjusted to that reading was placed in the root canal and stabilized with cement. The tooth was then extracted atraumatically. Following extraction apical 4 mm of root was shaved. The position of the minor diameter in relation to the anatomic apex was recorded for each tooth under stereomicroscope at ×10. The efficiency of two electronic apex locators to determine the minor diameter was statistically analyzed using paired sample t-test. RESULTS: The minor diameter was located within the limits of ±0.5 mm in 96.6% of the samples with the Root ZX and 93.2% of the samples with Raypex 5. The paired sample t-test showed no significant difference. CONCLUSION: On analyzing the results of our study it can be concluded that Raypex 5 was as effective as Root ZX in determining the minor diameter.

In vitro comparison of working length determination using three different electronic apex locators.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of the apex-locating functions of DentaPort ZX, Raypex 5 and Endo Master electronic apex locators (EALs) in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty extracted human single-rooted teeth with mature apices were used for the study. The real working length (RWL) was established by subtracting 0.5 mm from the actual root canal length. All teeth were mounted in an alginate model that was especially developed to test the EALs and the teeth were then measured with each EAL. The results were compared with the corresponding RWL, which was subtracted from the electronically determined distance. Data were analyzed using a paired-samples t-test, a Chi-square test and a repeated measure analysis of variance evaluation at the 0.05 level of significance. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed that no significant difference was found among all EALs (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The accuracy of the EALs was evaluated and all of the devices showed an acceptable determination of electronic working length between the ranges of ±0.5 mm.

Influence of apical periodontitis on the accuracy of 3 electronic root canal length measurement devices: an in vivo study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this in vivo study was to evaluate the influence of apical periodontitis (AP) on the accuracy of Dentaport ZX (J Morita, Kyoto, Japan), Raypex 5 (VDW, Munich, Germany), and i-Root (S-Denti, Seoul, Korea) electronic root canal length measurement devices (ERCLMDs). METHODS: Thirty-two single-rooted teeth scheduled for extraction, consisting of 16 teeth with AP and 16 teeth with normal periapex (NP), were selected. The access cavity was prepared, and the coronal portion of the canal was flared. The electronic working length (EWL) was determined by each ERCLMD according to each manufacturer's instructions. Each tooth was extracted, and the actual working length (AWL) was determined by inserting a size 15 K-file until the tip could be seen at a position tangential to the major foramen and then 0.5 mm was subtracted from the measurement. The distance from the file tip (EWL) to the point 0.5 mm coronal to the major foramen (AWL) was calculated. Data were analyzed using the nonparametric Fisher exact test and the chi-square test. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: The accuracies of Dentaport ZX, Raypex 5, and i-Root within ± 0.5 mm in the AP group were 93.8%, 81.3%, and 75.0%; they were 93.3%, 86.7%, and 73.3% in the NP group, respectively. There were no significant differences between the accuracy of each device in the 2 groups (P > .05). Considering the 2 groups of AP and NP, there were no statistically significant differences in the accuracy of the ERCLMDs (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of AP did not influence the accuracy of ERCLMDs.

A clinical evaluation on accuracy of RayPex5 apex locator for measuring root canal working length / 实用口腔医学杂志

In order to evaluate the accuracy of RayPex5 apex locator in measuring root canal working length in clinical practice and to analyze the possible factor resulting in deviation, the working length of total 211 root canals were measured by handing method and electronic method respectively. The exact working length of those root canals were determined by X-ray method. The accuracy rate of electronic method and handing method was 96.21% and 78.2% respectively, with significant difference(P<0.001). The accuracy rate of front teeth group and molar group measured by electronic method was 100% and 92.5% respectively, with significant difference(P<0.05), while the apical paradentitis group and the apical non-paradentitis group, the front teeth group and the premolar group, and the premolar group and the molar group didn' t differ from each other, respectively. The study showed that the accuracy rate of electronic method was high for determining root canal working length, and Raypex 5 apex locator could define apical seat to measure root canal working length accurately.