Cargando…
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 st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4502123/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26180412 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.159726 |
_version_ | 1782381146795933696 |
---|---|
author | Swapna, DV Krishna, Akash Patil, Anand C Rashmi, K Pai, Veena S Ranjini, MA |
author_facet | Swapna, DV Krishna, Akash Patil, Anand C Rashmi, K Pai, Veena S Ranjini, MA |
author_sort | Swapna, DV |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4502123 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45021232015-07-15 Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study Swapna, DV Krishna, Akash Patil, Anand C Rashmi, K Pai, Veena S Ranjini, MA J Conserv Dent Original Article 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. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4502123/ /pubmed/26180412 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.159726 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Swapna, DV Krishna, Akash Patil, Anand C Rashmi, K Pai, Veena S Ranjini, MA Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study |
title | Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study |
title_full | Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study |
title_short | Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study |
title_sort | comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: an in vivo study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4502123/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26180412 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.159726 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT swapnadv comparisonofthirdgenerationversusfourthgenerationelectronicapexlocatorsindetectingapicalconstrictionaninvivostudy AT krishnaakash comparisonofthirdgenerationversusfourthgenerationelectronicapexlocatorsindetectingapicalconstrictionaninvivostudy AT patilanandc comparisonofthirdgenerationversusfourthgenerationelectronicapexlocatorsindetectingapicalconstrictionaninvivostudy AT rashmik comparisonofthirdgenerationversusfourthgenerationelectronicapexlocatorsindetectingapicalconstrictionaninvivostudy AT paiveenas comparisonofthirdgenerationversusfourthgenerationelectronicapexlocatorsindetectingapicalconstrictionaninvivostudy AT ranjinima comparisonofthirdgenerationversusfourthgenerationelectronicapexlocatorsindetectingapicalconstrictionaninvivostudy |